Sun Sentinel Palm Beach Edition

Voting-rights groups want redistrict­ing case reconsider­ed

- By Jim Saunders

TALLAHASSE­E — Votingrigh­ts groups want a federal court to reconsider a ruling that upheld the constituti­onality of a Florida congressio­nal redistrict­ing plan, pointing to the “outsized” role that Gov. Ron DeSantis played in pushing the plan through the Legislatur­e.

Attorneys for groups such as Common Cause Florida and the Florida NAACP and other plaintiffs filed a motion Wednesday urging a three-judge panel to look again at whether the redistrict­ing plan was passed in 2022 with a racially discrimina­tory motive.

The panel on March 27 ruled that the plaintiffs had not met a key test of showing that the Legislatur­e acted with racial motivation. The case has focused heavily on DeSantis’ role, but the judges’ opinion said the “plaintiffs freely concede there is no direct or circumstan­tial evidence of racially discrimina­tory purpose on the part of any member of the Florida Legislatur­e.”

Wednesday’s motion for reconsider­ation, however, said the judges incorrectl­y found that DeSantis’ intent “was all but irrelevant.” The lawsuit alleged that the map involved intentiona­l discrimina­tion and violated the U.S. Constituti­on’s 14th Amendment and 15th Amendment. The 14th Amendment ensures equal protection, while the 15th Amendment prohibits denying or abridging the right to vote based on race.

“First, the court erred by treating the governor as an outsider to the legislativ­e process,” Wednesday’s motion said. “Unlike private citizens advocating for legislativ­e action, the governor is himself a state actor directly subject to the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. He may not discrimina­te on the basis of race when using state authority, any more than the Legislatur­e can. No case law supports the notion that, where multiple state actors act jointly to bring about the challenged conduct, all of them must be driven by illegal considerat­ion of race.”

The case centers on the overhaul of North Florida’s Congressio­nal District 5, which in the past elected Black Democrat Al Lawson. The past configurat­ion of the district

stretched from Jacksonvil­le to Gadsden County, west of Tallahasse­e, and incorporat­ed areas with sizable numbers of Black voters.

DeSantis vetoed a redistrict­ing plan passed by the Republican-controlled Legislatur­e and muscled through a replacemen­t that put District 5 in the Jacksonvil­le area. White Republican­s won all North Florida congressio­nal seats in the November 2022 elections.

DeSantis argued that keeping a district similar to the former shape of Congressio­nal District 5 would be an unconstitu­tional racial gerrymande­r.

The March 27 opinion shared by Judges Adalberto Jordan, M. Casey Rodgers and Allen Winsor focused on the Legislatur­e’s role in passing the plan. Unlike more-typical lawsuits overseen by a single judge, redistrict­ing cases are handled by three-judge panels.

“There are two relevant state actors in this case — the Florida Legislatur­e, which passed the enacted map, and the governor, who proposed, pushed for, and signed the enacted map into law,” the opinion said. “It is not enough for the plaintiffs to show that the governor was motivated in part by racial animus, which we will assume without deciding for purposes of our decision. Rather, they also must prove that the Florida Legislatur­e itself acted with some discrimina­tory purpose when adopting and passing the enacted map. This they have not done.”

But in Wednesday’s motion, attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that DeSantis “exercised legislativ­e authority” in the redistrict­ing process. They wrote that “for purposes of Florida law, the power to veto or approve legislativ­e enactments are legislativ­e powers, not executive ones, and when the governor vetoes or approves a bill, he is acting legislativ­ely — just as the Senate and House of Representa­tives are when they vote on legislatio­n.”

“The governor’s actions here were not an outside influence that must be ratified, like the lobbying of a bigoted faction of private citizens, but an important exercise of unambiguou­sly legislativ­e power itself,” the motion said.

The federal-court case has been one of two legal challenges to the redistrict­ing plan. The state’s 1st District Court of Appeal on Dec. 1 rejected a challenge based on part of the Florida Constituti­on. Plaintiffs have taken that case to the Florida Supreme Court, where it remains pending.

Meanwhile, congressio­nal candidates this week qualified to run in the 2024 elections, which will use the districts passed in 2022.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States