Democrats question how court cases upholding Florida’s congressional map warrant redrawing it

No congressional maps were presented at a second meeting of the Florida House’s redistricting committee. Now, Democrats are questioning why any would be drafted at all.

Andy Bardos, counsel for the House, told members that two key court cases contribute to a different legal landscape than when the Legislature last approved congressional lines in 2022. Most importantly, the Florida Supreme Court upheld that map, which was drawn by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ staff and broke up a seat previously held by a Black Democrat. The other case out of Louisiana awaits a Supreme Court ruling in the coming term.

Rep. Kevin Chambliss, a Homestead Democrat, questioned how the Florida Supreme Court upholding the existing map merited the reconsideration of new lines.

“That map was deemed constitutional,” Chambliss said. “If that was conclusive to an action, then that means that’s done. So then what is the reason why we’re doing it now? I’m confused, because it seems like there was a conclusion there based on the court case, and now we’re having a conversation where the second court case isn’t even finished yet.”

Bardos stressed that the only reason the Florida Supreme Court considered the congressional map was because civil rights groups sued, but the legal challenge focused only on the breakup of the North Florida seat previously represented by U.S. Rep. Al Lawson.

Justices upheld the map, but determined the prior configuration of Lawson’s seat, itself the product of a 2015 Supreme Court decision, improperly considered race as the predominant motivation in drawing a district spanning from Tallahassee to Jacksonville.

“In the process of deciding that, the court articulated legal principles that had never before been set forth by a court in that way,” Bardos said.

For example, he said that even if lawmakers want to hold to a nondiminishment requirement in the “Fair Districts” amendments in Florida’s Constitution, lawmakers “can’t make race predominant.”

Still, Bardos in presentations also explained that portions of Florida’s Fair Districts remain unchanged, including a ban on drawing maps to favor a political party.

That could likely fuel any legal challenge to maps produced by the Legislature ahead of the 2026 Midterms. President Donald Trump has pressured Republican-controlled Legislatures to draw House maps that better improve the situation for Republicans.

Minutes before the Wednesday redistricting meeting, Republican National Committee Chair Joe Gruters, a member of the Florida Senate, reposted a prediction on X that Florida could net as many as five seats in redistricting. Florida’s U.S. House delegation currently includes 20 Republicans and eight Democrats.

But notably, the House is moving forward with redistricting before DeSantis or the Florida Senate takes action. Both the Governor and Senate President Ben Albritton said they think new cartography should wait until the Supreme Court rules in another redistricting case, Louisiana v. Callais.

“Just no matter what else happens, that is going to have to be addressed,” DeSantis said last week.

Bardos said any ruling on that case will only directly impact Louisiana. However, he said the Legislature may take action at any point to adhere to legal principles set forth in that ruling, issues that will impact any court challenges to political cartography in the future.

Rep. Bruce Antone, an Orlando Democrat, suggested there’s no legally compelling reason for the Legislature to look at maps right now.

“Once a state goes through the redistricting process, what compelling reasons would there be outside of a court case requiring redistricting?” Antone said. “What compelling reasons would require us to do this exercise a second time, mid-census?”

Rep. Mike Redondo, a Miami Republican chairing the House redistricting committee, said he didn’t want lawmakers discussing “hypotheticals,” including whether lawmakers would even consider a new map. He also said lawmakers can undertake whatever process they choose, including still deciding whether to undertake field meetings around Florida.

“As a body, we’re going to make those decisions in terms of how input will be received.”

But at the meeting on Wednesday, the committee took no public comment, including from South Florida members of the public who bussed to the hearing.