Florida’s Congressional Map Stands & Trump’s Immunity Before SCOTUS - Top 3 Takeaways
- Florida's current congressional map will stand for what appears to be at least one more election cycle at least. Most of the attention directed at Florida’s Supreme Court recently has centered on the topic of abortion. That’s the result of last week’s hearing before the court considering whether to allow the proposed constitutional abortion amendment on voters ballots this November. While we await a decision in that case there was another highly effectual decision made by the court that hasn’t gained nearly as much attention, however it’s one that will affect all of Florida’s voters and could impact which party controls the House of Representatives next year. Florida’s current congressional map, which was effectively drawn by Governor DeSantis and approved in a special session preceding the 2022 midterm election (after he rejected the map drawn and ratified by the legislature), has been subjected to multiple legal challenges at the state and federal level. The challenge that’s been brought at the state level currently sits with the state Supreme Court which has yet to schedule a hearing as lawyers representing the legal challenge to the map have until February 28th to file their initial brief with the court. A deadline that then would set up a series of other deadlines which could result in additional delays of up to 90 days in the case. And the clock on this election cycle is ticking. Congressional candidates need to know where the district lines are drawn to know where they intend to run and the qualifying period for candidates concludes April 26th in advance of Florida’s August primaries. All of that added up to a timeline that didn’t compute unless the Florida Supreme Court sped up the legal timeline. That’s what the plaintiffs in the case asked the Florida Supreme Court to do. The court has issued an order declining to speed up the timeline of the trial which effectively means that Florida’s current congressional map will remain in place for the 2024 election cycle, at least as it pertains to the legal challenges within the state. Unless a federal court soon rules to overturn Florida’s map, which isn’t expected before the April deadline either, our existing maps which were in place when a record number of Republicans were elected to congress from the state of Florida will remain in place for at least one more cycle. The map battle is a long way from over, but it’s been effectively put to bed for this election cycle.
- One week to respond. Speaking of legal maneuvers and Supreme Courts... As expected, on Monday, the Trump legal team appealed the D.C. Appeal’s court ruling denying the former president’s immunity claim in his effort to avoid prosecution in the January 6th related case and potentially other pending criminal trials as well. However, in a bit of a twist, the Trump legal team asked the Supreme court to stay the lower court panel’s ruling until an appeal to the D.C. court can be made to have the immunity challenge heard before the full court. In response the Supreme Court gave Special Prosecutor Jack Smith one week to respond. On the surface that might sound like a bunch of gobbledygook that’s all part of a legal process that you don’t care too much about. But here’s what’s interesting about this. Timing. Many news outlets noted yesterday that the one-week timeline for a response doesn’t exactly project a sense of urgency (which is really eight days because Monday is President’s Day – which is somewhat ironic in the context of this case). For example, The Hill pointed out that the Supreme Court, within the past two months, has asked for similar responses in different cases in under a week twice. So, is there a lesser sense of urgency in getting to a ruling here? That’s what’s unknown. As I’ve stated right along, Trump will win on ballot access, however he’ll lose on presidential immunity for the purpose of avoiding prosecution...but the question remains when. And that when determines when the January 6th trial can be rescheduled – and most specifically whether it can be tried and brought to a conclusion before the presidential election. Last week when I discussed the D.C. court’s decision, I noted this: Trump’s legal team, whose goal is to delay all of Trump’s outstanding legal matters until after the presidential election has been forced into a quick choice. A wrinkle in the D.C. Court’s decision was to thwart Trump’s efforts to use the immunity case to further delay. The law allows for the Trump legal team to have up to 30 days to decide what to do next. Ordinarily that could have included waiting 30 days and then asking for the case to be heard before the full D.C. Circuit Court. However, in the panel’s decision they said that if Trump’s team doesn’t appeal the case to the Supreme Court by the end of the day on Monday, they’ll free the D.C. judge overseeing the January 6th case to reschedule. That’s a clear indication that the full court is unlikely to be willing to hear the immunity case and it’s certain that the original decision against presidential immunity would stand. So, what will Trump’s team do now? The odds are they will make the appeal to the Supreme Court on Monday. From there the questions become... Will the Supreme Court decide to hear the appeal, or will they allow the lower court ruling to stand? If they choose to hear the appeal how quickly will they schedule it? And if that happens how long will they take to make a final ruling? The answers to those questions will determine how quickly the January 6th case can be rescheduled and whether it can be brought to completion prior to the presidential election. Could it be that the Supreme Court, even if it may eventually side with the appeal’s court decision on presidential immunity...doesn’t care for the lower court’s choice to thwart the legal timeline norms to attempt to get to a result and thus a trial quicker? I don’t know but it could be. In the meantime...
- The Supreme Court could have immediately denied the Trump team’s legal request allowing the lower court’s ruling to stand. They didn’t. So, at a minimum that’s added what appears to be at least another week to the process beyond what the D.C. Appeal’s court was going for. All of these behind-the-scenes twists and turns mean a whole lot more than they may at first seem. The odds are still high that the January 6th trial will happen before the election. But they’re slightly lower than they were before yesterday’s decision by Chief Justice John Roberts. It’s possible that there are Supreme Court Justices who don’t feel it’s appropriate for these trials to take place in the middle of a presidential election year. If that’s the case, and I don’t know that to be true, there are things they could do to slow the process down. The biggest tell in this regard would be if the court were to choose to hear the immunity challenge. Time is of the essence.