Florida Supreme Court Greenlights Republican Gerrymander for 2026, Ignoring Voter-Approved Anti-Gerrymandering Law
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Despite Floridians' clear rejection of partisan gerrymandering, the conservative-dominated Florida Supreme Court has allowed Governor Ron DeSantis' heavily gerrymandered congressional map to be used in the 2026 elections, disregarding the state's constitutional amendment against such practices.
The Florida Supreme Court, now stacked with justices appointed by right-wing Governor Ron DeSantis, has issued an order permitting the use of a congressional map engineered to entrench Republican power in the 2026 elections. This decision blatantly disregards a 2010 amendment, overwhelmingly approved by voters, that was supposed to ban partisan gerrymandering in Florida. The court's majority shamefully refused to even consider whether the map violates this amendment, effectively rubber-stamping a plan designed to undermine fair representation.
Justice Jorge Labarga, the lone dissenting voice on the court, condemned the majority for failing to intervene, as the court had done in the past to protect voters. He warned, “For a second time in fewer than three years, in a substantively similar context, the district court has elected a path of delayed appellate review. Only this time, the votes of even more Floridians are at stake.”
Justice Adam S. Tanenbaum, in a separate concurrence, downplayed the significance, noting that the court had previously allowed elections to proceed under maps later found unconstitutional. “There is no need for special treatment in this case,” he wrote, dismissing the gravity of the situation.
The map, rammed through the legislature at DeSantis’ behest, could hand Republicans up to four additional congressional seats, further eroding democratic representation. Plaintiffs—a coalition of voters and voting-rights groups represented by the Elias Law Group—filed suit on May 4, arguing that the plan flagrantly violates the Fair Districts Amendment (FDA). Yet Circuit Judge Joshua Hawkes, a DeSantis appointee, denied a temporary injunction, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s regressive decision in Louisiana v. Callis, which weakened protections for minority voters.
Hawkes outrageously claimed that if forced to choose between the FDA’s anti-partisan mandate and the Constitution’s Equal Protection guarantee, “the potential partisan intent is the lesser of the two evils.” Plaintiffs appealed, but the Florida Supreme Court only granted an expedited briefing, ultimately siding with entrenched interests.
Governor DeSantis, who has packed the court with loyalists since 2019, boasted on social media about the ruling, celebrating the court’s refusal to challenge his gerrymandered map. Attorney General James Uthmeier echoed this, calling the decision a “complete and total victory”—for partisan manipulation, not for Florida voters.
