The city of Miami has prevailed in its attempt to appeal a map drawn by plaintiffs that was subsequently approved by a district court last month.
In a 2-1 decision last Friday, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted the city’s motion to block Judge K. Michael Moore’s ruling. The city will instead use a map approved by commissioners June 14 in the upcoming November election.
Both the city’s 2022 approved map and its remedial map proffered in June were struck down by the district court for using racial gerrymandering tactics in violation of the constitutional Voting Rights Act. In 2022, before the lawsuit was filed in December, many residents of West Coconut Grove argued that their historically Black neighborhood was split between three districts, weakening their power to form a cohesive voting bloc.
(ACLU)
The plaintiffs’ proposed map, struck down by an appeals court Aug. 4.
The map approved by Moore would have reunited all of Coconut Grove into District 2. It also would have moved Morningside into District 5, which is currently represented by Commission Chair Christine King.
The city’s appeal comes on the grounds that Moore’s ruling drastically altered district boundaries too close to a pending municipal election, where three seats are up for grabs. The city claimed in a statement that the plaintiffs’ map does nothing to “correct” – and in fact exacerbates – the racially divided districts.
Commissioners have long justified the fabrication of three majority-Hispanic districts, one Black district and one Anglo district in the city of Miami, and assert that the new district court-approved map abides by these same divisions.
Prior to the appeals court’s decision, plaintiffs and attorneys representing the city had filed objections to each other’s claims. On the one hand, plaintiffs argued that the city was well aware of an Aug. 1 deadline set by the Miami-Dade County elections department, chose to dismiss its initial appeal and was therefore too late in its pursuance of another. Plaintiffs also note that the city’s remedial map hardly differs from the one deemed unconstitutional in May.
On the other hand, the city argued that the plaintiffs’ claims toward unconstitutionality are technically false in that they’ve only been deliberated via injunction. Although its original map was enjoined from being used, attorneys argued, the city reserves the legal right to pass a new map in its place. The city’s objection noted that until a trial is held in 2024, its remedial map passed in June is and should remain the official map for this year’s election.
Judges Elizabeth L. Branch and Robert Luck were in the majority, voting in favor of the city’s appeal. Judge Charles R. Wilson dissented, siding with the plaintiffs.
District 2 Commissioner Sabina Covo, District 1 Commissioner Alex Diaz de la Portilla and District 4 Commissioner Manolo Reyes are all up for re-election Nov. 7.