A federal judge today rejected a challenge to the Fair Districts amendment to the Florida Constitution voted in by the citizens of Florida in the 2010 election.
The Fair Districts Amendment prevents the use of redistricting for political or discriminatory purposes. It states:
Section 20. STANDARDS FOR ESTABLISHING CONGRESSIONAL
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
In establishing congressional district boundaries:
(1) No apportionment plan or individual district shall be drawn with the
intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent; and districts
shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the
equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the
political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of
their choice; and districts shall consist of contiguous territory.
(2) Unless compliance with the standards in this subsection conflicts with
the standards in subsection (1) or with federal law, districts shall be as
nearly equal in population as is practicable; districts shall be compact;
and districts shall, where feasible, utilize existing political and
geographical boundaries.
(3) The order in which the standards within subsections (1) and (2) of this
section are set forth shall not be read to establish any priority of one
standard over the other within that subsection.
Doesn't get much fairer than that, does it? That's why Republicans hate it.
The Republican legislature, at taxpayer expense, challenged this Amendment. They argued that it violates the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Elections Clause of the U.S. Constituion provides that the “Times, Places and
Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed
in each State by the Legislature thereof.” U.S. Const. art. I, §4, cl.1.
The Republicans argued that, because Fair Districts was enacted by referendum rather than by the legislature, it violated the Elections Clause. Judge Ursula Ungaro rejected that argument.
Judge Ungaro said that the Florida Constitution can set up the structure for the Florida Legislature to act. Discussing an earlier Supreme Court case, the Smiley case, she said:
In sum, Smiley stands for the proposition that Congressional redistricting
must be effected through the state legislative process. It does not require that the
state legislatures be the sole source of the conditions prescribing their Elections
Clause powers. Amendment VI is thus consistent with Smiley, and, moreover, with
the original understanding of the Elections Clause, which both supporters and
defenders viewed as a provision primarily concerned with federal-state relations,
not with directing the states to follow a precise legislative procedure.
The gist of the decision, as I understand it, is that the people of Florida, through amendment to the Florida Constitution, can set up the structure and parameters under which the Legislature can act. They can require the Legislature to conform to particular standards and procedures when it exercises its power under the Elections Clause.
Bottom line, this is a big victory for democracy.