This article is extremely important and I want to share broadly, but I'm a bit confused on this point: would you please clarify for me? "Ron claimed the district was a racial gerrymander. This is an objectively false claim that has no current legal basis." As a 'layperson,' it appears to me that statement conflicts with this one, "What is clear is the Duval-only 5th would clearly be in line with current case law" Is the Duval-only 5h actually inline with case law? Maybe a different question, but I would have thought case law, both fed and state, would protect the existing dst 5 boundary.
Hey Diana! Yeah I wish I could have gone into more detail, but I was hitting the length limit for the post. The general legal view I saw was that the current east-west 5th is protected. But at the same time, a Duval-only 5th would also have been protected from claims that it was a racial gerrymander. What I meant was Ron claimed the Duval-only 5th is illegal because it uses race, but that is not current case law, and since the district uses other natural boundaries as well, its not like its some crazy snake-like seat. My point was Duval-only 5th is legally sound from Ron's conservative-push to draw 'race-blind'
North Florida can have three legal viewpoints
1) East-West is needed because its the strongest black-opportunity seat
2) Duval-only is strong enough to be a black-opportunity seat
3) Neither is acceptable, must draw race-blind
I'm basically saying there is legal arguments for 1 or 2, but nothing in current law for argument 3.
Thanks! My confusion. I really appreciate your work. It is such a great service. I signed up for newsletter and posting on twitter and FB.
I am afraid DeSantis is acting in concert with a plan to prohibit using race as an equalizer - in any circumstance. The SCOTUS has already begun, reversing Wisc supreme court ruling on redistricting map on the basis the state court was mistaken in its use of race to select a voting map. I have not read the decision.
This article is extremely important and I want to share broadly, but I'm a bit confused on this point: would you please clarify for me? "Ron claimed the district was a racial gerrymander. This is an objectively false claim that has no current legal basis." As a 'layperson,' it appears to me that statement conflicts with this one, "What is clear is the Duval-only 5th would clearly be in line with current case law" Is the Duval-only 5h actually inline with case law? Maybe a different question, but I would have thought case law, both fed and state, would protect the existing dst 5 boundary.
Hey Diana! Yeah I wish I could have gone into more detail, but I was hitting the length limit for the post. The general legal view I saw was that the current east-west 5th is protected. But at the same time, a Duval-only 5th would also have been protected from claims that it was a racial gerrymander. What I meant was Ron claimed the Duval-only 5th is illegal because it uses race, but that is not current case law, and since the district uses other natural boundaries as well, its not like its some crazy snake-like seat. My point was Duval-only 5th is legally sound from Ron's conservative-push to draw 'race-blind'
North Florida can have three legal viewpoints
1) East-West is needed because its the strongest black-opportunity seat
2) Duval-only is strong enough to be a black-opportunity seat
3) Neither is acceptable, must draw race-blind
I'm basically saying there is legal arguments for 1 or 2, but nothing in current law for argument 3.
Thanks! My confusion. I really appreciate your work. It is such a great service. I signed up for newsletter and posting on twitter and FB.
I am afraid DeSantis is acting in concert with a plan to prohibit using race as an equalizer - in any circumstance. The SCOTUS has already begun, reversing Wisc supreme court ruling on redistricting map on the basis the state court was mistaken in its use of race to select a voting map. I have not read the decision.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-reverse-wisconsin-court-ruling-that-increased-majority-black-districts-in-state-legislature/