Florida Judge Rules Redistricting Plan Unconstitutional, Citing Diminished Voting Power for Black Community

In a pivotal case echoing other redistricting battles across the United States, Florida Circuit Judge J. Lee Marsh declared Florida’s most recent congressional map unconstitutional on grounds that it hampered Black voters’ ability to elect representatives of their choice. The judgement took place in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, in and for Leon County, Florida, a state court in northern Florida.

In his decision, Marsh found that the redrawn map violates Article III, Section 20 of the Florida Constitution (Fair Districts Amendment). The change reduced the ability of Black voters in North Florida to select the representatives they preferred. He held that the Legislature cannot eliminate majority-minority districts or weaken other historically performing minority districts where doing so actually diminishes a minority group’s ability to elect its preferred candidates.

The judge asserted that the plaintiffs, who consisted of individual voters and voter participation organizations, aptly demonstrated that the revised map weakens or, more drastically, eradicates Black voters’ ability to elect their preferred candidates.

Marsh dismissed the state’s defense that the Fair Districts Amendment contravenes the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution. According to the state, the Amendment would compel it to implement a racial gerrymander at odds with the Fourteenth Amendment, a claim Marsh rejected. He concluded that the state did not have the standing to launch this claim.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed the redistricting plan, SB 2-C, into law in April 2022. Shortly after its implementation, the plaintiffs sued, alleging that the plan did not comply with the Fair Districts Amendment and did not even purport to uphold it. The plaintiffs argue that the governor’s plan would halve the number of Black districts from four to two, giving the Republican party a disproportionate advantage in twenty out of twenty-eight districts. This case serves as a reminder of the ongoing struggles over voting rights and district lines that continue to shape U.S. politics.