Desantis Redistricting Plan confirmed by the Florida Supreme Court, critics say that it was diluted the black voting power

On July 17, the Florida Supreme Court maintained a redistribution plan proposed by Governor Ron Desantis, which ruled that it does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution of Florida. The court, who currently has a conservative majority, includes various judges appointed during the term of office of Desantis.

According to the Associated Press, the court ruled that the recovery of the cards To a state that would unite black communities in the entire state, in an area that includes 200 miles that extends from Jacksonville to just west of Tallahassee would form inadmissible racial racial racing.

This statement was declared by supreme judge Carlos Muniz, who in the opinion of the majority: “The record will undoubtedly leave behind that such a district racing preacher would be. The record also gives us no reasonable basis for thinking that further lawsuits would discover a potentially viable remedy.”

The Supreme Court of Florida confirmed the redistribution card proposed by Governor Ron Desantis, who is expected to give the Republicans a 20-8 benefit in conference elections. The previous map had made the election possible of the former Democratic representative Al Lawson, who is black, but the new map divides that district in three separate republican districts.

This regulation was criticized by Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, one of the organizations that brought the lawsuit that disputed the map as potentially unconstitutional because of concern about partisan gerrymage.

Jenkins said that the ruling of the court, a reversal of the earlier ruling of a lower court, was “alarming” because of her conviction that it “reduces the voting power of black Floridians.”

“The refusal of the Florida Supreme Court to maintain the Studies Act, which means that an unconstitutional map can remain in place, is alarming,” Jenkins said. “The court leaves the most elementary role of the judiciary: to give right to the people. This decision is shameful that the card of the State actively reduces the voting power of Black Floridians. Make no mistake, the fight for fair maps in Florida is far from over,” she is promised.

Justice Jorge Labarga, the only defensible in the case, argued according to his opinion that not allowing the claimants to produce an alternative map makes it possible to make an unfrangular election card possible.

“By adding further lawsuits, the decision of the majority now allows to remain a conference distribution plan that is unconstitutional under the Constitution of Florida,” Labarga wrote in his opinion.

The outcome of this case could have consequences for other states in the south, where voters control -ID -laws and redistribution practices and have attracted legal challenges about concerns about fair representation and access to the mood.

In Texas, Governor Greg Abbott has had to deal with criticism from Houston Democrats about his plan To continue With redistribution after the death of Rep. Sylvester Turner. The approach of Abbott, who matches the preferences of former President Donald Trump and resembles the redistribution strategy used by Desantis, has been described by some Houston Democrats as a politically motivated effort.

Amanda Edwards, one of the many candidates to replace Turner’s chair as the representative from the 18th district, said Cubinity 11 that the possible redistribution of the maps would have far -reaching implications by Republicans in Texas.

“This attempt to get rid of the majority of minority districts will have far -reaching consequences for people in this district, and much more,” said Edwards in a press conference.

Related content: Black voters are confronted with uncertainty after the Supreme Court recommends more arguments in the Louisiana Gymander case