Dem
47
GOP
53
There were a couple of pretty important developments on the gerrymandering front yesterday. We'll start in the Deep South, and work our way up from there.
The "Deep Southern" news is that Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) released the House district map he wants the state legislature to adopt. Here it is, such as it is:
DeSantis does not appear to have shared anything more specific than this yet, so it's hard to assess the impact of the new map. However, the four blue districts that would theoretically go the way of the dodo are the ones currently represented by Democrats Kathy Castor, Lois Frankel, Darren Soto and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Undoubtedly, the thought of booting Wasserman Schultz—friend of Hillary Clinton and former DNC Chair—is a particular source of delight for the RonBot.
Democrats, from Hakeem Jeffries on down, promptly declared the map to be a dummymander, and warned it would cost Florida Republicans more seats than it would gain them. That's probably wishcasting at this point, since presumably if the Democrats really believed that, they would keep their mouths shut and let the Florida Republicans shoot themselves in the foot. Exactly how wishy the wishcasting is, we do not know, due to the lack of specifics. Even Cook Political Report, which is the go-to for this kind of analysis, hasn't been able to crunch the numbers yet.
This said, there are still a couple of hurdles in DeSantis' path, so he better make sure to put his boots on. First, it's not clear what Republicans in the Florida state legislature think about all this. They have been increasingly willing to defy the Governor over the last 18 months or so. And while they might see value in toeing the MAGA line, they also might not. In particular, if they approve a gerrymander, and it becomes a dummymander, they might well get the blame, which could harm their chances at reelection or at a promotion to Washington, DC.
Assuming the legislature signs off, then the courts will have their say. In 2010, Florida voters adopted the "Fair Districts" voting standards, which specifically prohibit redrawing district maps for political purposes. Consequently, anti-gerrymander forces think they have a solid case here, and that the courts will toss the new map if it is adopted. On the other hand, the courts already gutted part of the "Fair Districts" standards, the portions having to do with minority representation. Consequently, pro-gerrymander forces think that means the entire "Fair Districts" ball of wax is in abeyance, and that the courts will uphold the new map if it is adopted. So, who knows?
And speaking of the courts, the other big news is from Virginia. The new maps adopted last week were stayed shortly thereafter by a staunchly Republican judge. Yesterday, they were un-stayed by Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland, who effectively ruled that this is a political question and not a judicial one. We can't ascertain exactly what Thorne-Begland's politics are, since he served in nonpartisan positions before being nominated to the bench. He was nominated by a Republican governor (Bob McDonnell), but he was confirmed largely with Democratic votes.
Anyhow, a final resolution here is going to have to come from the Virginia Supreme Court. And yesterday, the Virginia Supremes listened to oral arguments in the case. The key question, as a reminder, is whether the Democratic-controlled legislature followed the proper timeline for ballot initiatives. Folks in the courtroom yesterday said that the tea leaves are murky, and there's no clear indication as to which way the justices are leaning. They'll have to decide soon, however, as primary season is nigh upon us. (Z)