Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
US Midterms 2026
6JUN

Fair Districts lawsuit hits Florida map

2 min read
12:16UTC

Plaintiffs filed the first state-court challenge to Florida's 24R-4D map on Monday 4 May, hours after Ron DeSantis signed it, citing the 2010 Fair Districts Amendment.

PoliticsDeveloping
Key takeaway

Florida's 2010 Fair Districts Amendment is the only legal route left after Callais closed the federal one.

Plaintiffs filed the first legal challenge to the 24R-4D map within hours of Governor Ron DeSantis's signature on the afternoon of Monday 4 May.⁠1 The complaint cites Florida's Fair Districts Amendment, the 2010 state constitutional ban on partisan gerrymanders adopted by referendum, which prohibits drawing districts to favour or disfavour a political party.

The procedural point matters because Louisiana v. Callais removed the federal Voting Rights Act Section 2 route to challenge mid-decade maps; the Fair Districts Amendment is a state-level ban that the federal ruling does not touch. State courts in Tallahassee, not federal courts in Atlanta, will hear it.

The amendment is narrower than VRA Section 2 in scope: it does not mandate majority-minority districts, it bars partisan intent. Plaintiffs must therefore prove the DeSantis map was drawn for partisan advantage, a higher evidentiary bar than the demographic test that has now been retired federally. The 2015 Florida Supreme Court ruling that struck the prior congressional map under the same amendment is the only useful precedent. Senate President Ben Albritton's April refusal to draft the map and DeSantis's original session-timing manoeuvre both feed into the litigation record on intent.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Florida voters passed the Fair Districts Amendment in 2010 by a large margin. It says that when Florida draws congressional districts, maps cannot be designed to give one political party an advantage. When courts find a violation, they can strike the map and order a redraw. This amendment exists separately from federal law, so when the Supreme Court removed a key federal protection for minority voters last week, the Florida amendment remained fully in force. The new lawsuit argues that the 24R-4D map was designed precisely to help Republicans and hurt Democrats, which the amendment prohibits. The challenge does not claim racial discrimination under the Voting Rights Act. Instead, it claims partisan intent. To win, plaintiffs need to show that the map was drawn to favour Republicans, which may involve examining emails, meeting records, and who was in the room when the lines were drawn.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Florida's Fair Districts Amendment was drafted specifically to address the 2002 gerrymander and the subsequent 2012 maps. Its framers anticipated legislative manipulation and wrote a broad intent standard. What they did not anticipate was a governor taking direct control of map design, effectively bypassing the legislative process the Amendment was written to police.

The legal gap exists because Florida's constitution gives the governor authority to submit a proposed map to the legislature, which the legislature may adopt or amend. DeSantis used this power to its maximum extent; the legislature ratified the submission without substantive revision. The Amendment's drafters assumed the legislature would be the active designer.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    Discovery in the Fair Districts case may produce internal communications from the governor's redistricting staff that expand the evidentiary record beyond what the 2015 Romo litigation surfaced.

    Short term · 0.65
  • Opportunity

    If the Florida Supreme Court grants an expedited hearing, a remedial map order before the November 2026 election could restore one or more of the four targeted Democratic districts.

    Short term · 0.5
  • Precedent

    A ruling on whether the Fair Districts Amendment reaches governor-drafted maps would define the constitutional boundary of executive map-submission authority across every state where the governor has formal map powers.

    Long term · 0.75
First Reported In

Update #5 · Callais lands; maps move

Florida Phoenix· 7 May 2026
Read original →
Different Perspectives
Judge Adolf Zeman, Alaska Superior Court
Judge Adolf Zeman, Alaska Superior Court
Zeman refused to dismiss the League of Women Voters, Alaska Black Caucus and ACLU of Alaska suit over the state giving DOJ its unredacted voter list. The privacy claims now go to evidence-gathering under the Alaska Constitution.
Judge Thomas Schroeder, US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Judge Thomas Schroeder, US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Schroeder refused on 19 October to block the State Board of Elections rule that rejects mail ballots with an unsealed or missing inner envelope. He found the challengers had delayed and that relief was infeasible with voting under way, and pointed to notice-and-cure provisions as a safeguard.
Stephen Richer, Republican former Maricopa County recorder
Stephen Richer, Republican former Maricopa County recorder
Richer submitted a brief on 20 October supporting the voting groups on documentary proof of citizenship at registration. He takes no position on the separate 90-day voter-removal question.
Senate Leadership Fund
Senate Leadership Fund
The Senate Leadership Fund began spending for interim Senator Darline Graham Nordone on 19 October, taking its South Carolina total to $4.06m, including $2.25m against Democrat Annie Andrews. Republicans are now paying to defend a seat in a state Donald Trump carried in 2024.
WinSenate, the ad-buying affiliate of Senate Majority PAC
WinSenate, the ad-buying affiliate of Senate Majority PAC
WinSenate began buying Kansas airtime against Roger Marshall on 10 October and had reported $8.14m there by 20 October. Marshall held $922,088 in cash on 30 September and the NRSC gave him no party money in September, so the Democratic side is spending where the Republican committee has not.
County Board of Arlington County
County Board of Arlington County
Arlington says federal Polling Place Policies allowing armed agents at polling sites breach 18 USC 592, the 1865 ban on troops or armed men at an election. It reads Markwayne Mullin's 1 September remarks as confirming such a policy, and asks Judge Brinkema to keep armed federal staff from its polls and drop boxes.

Written with AI from Lowdown's published reporting. Not individually reviewed by an editor. Editorial standards.