# Florida redistricting lawsuit
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [May 28, 2014, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478 "2014-05-28T17:49:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/1 "2014-05-28T17:49:54Z")
Latest stage in the long, long fight against gerrymandering in Florida. General outline on [Ballotpedia](http://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Florida).
[In 2005](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=314742) there was a movement to put an initiative on the ballot to take the redistricting power away from the state legislature and give it to an independent nonpartisan/bipartisan commission. Enough petition-signatures were collected, but the Supreme Court of Florida kept the amendment off the ballot as not being “single-subject.”
[In 2010](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575770&highlight=redistricting) there was another pair of initiatives that got onto the ballot and were approved by the voters. These constitutional amendments left redistricting with the legislature, but established certain standards to be followed.
[Amendment 5:](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_Legislative_District_Boundaries,_Amendment_5_(2010))
> [@](#):
>
> Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.
[Amendment 6:](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_Congressional_District_Boundaries,_Amendment_6_(2010))
> [@](#):
>
> Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.
I predicted in my 2010 thread:
> [@Anti-gerrymandering measures on Florida ballot](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-gerrymandering-measures-on-florida-ballot/551396/1):
>
> These amendments do **not** take the redistricting power away from the legislature, so I guess any question of their application will have to be resolved in court challenges.
And so it is happening now. The League of Women Voters filed suit in Leon County (where the state capital, Tallahassee, is located) to challenge the redistricting map the legislature (both houses Republican-controlled) came up with. [The National Democratic Redistricting Trust is bankrolling the lawsuit.](http://tbo.com/news/politics/state-redistricting-lawsuits-get-political-20140421/)[Latest news:](http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-court-allows-records-but-closes-courtroom-20140527,0,649474.post)
> [@](#):
>
> TALLAHASSEE – The Florida Supreme Court decided late Tuesday to allow records and testimony from some top Republican operatives to be used in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of congressional maps the Legislature drew in 2012.
>
> But the court also ordered that the trial would be closed to the public and media when the records are utilized.
>
> The court ruled that records and emails of Pat Bainter and Gainesville-based Data Targeting – which was paid $6.2 million over the last three years by the Republican Party of Florida – are relevant to the trial. But “any disclosure or use of the documents must take place under seal in a courtroom closed to the public,” its 5-2 decision said.
>
> The order sides with Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis, who is hearing the case against the Legislature brought by the League of Women Voters and other groups, and reverses a decision an appeals court made last week to block the records from being used in the case.
>
> Lawyers for the plaintiffs have argued the records a critical part of their case to show that Republican lawmakers, political consultants and others colluded to draw maps that violated the 2010 constitutional reform banning intentional gerrymandering.
Other stories on the lawsuit are aggregated [here](http://fairdistrictsnow.org/news/) at the [fairdistrictsnow.org](http://fairdistrictsnow.org) website.
Is anything like this happening in other states?
---
### Author:  [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/2 "2014-05-28T20:07:37Z")
I like my proposal: districts must be drawn with populations divided among districts as evenly as possible. The majority party draws the map. Some sort of inverse-square rule is applied (take the distance of each voter from the center of the district, square it, add 'em up, something like that) to form a total score. Submit for approval.
The **minority** party may choose either to approve the map, OR to submit their own map that improves on the inverse-square score by at least 10%. If they can do so, their map goes into effect. If they can’t do so, the majority map goes into effect.
Turn the partisan rancor to our benefit.
---
### Author:  [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/3 "2014-05-28T20:12:38Z")
Which political party does the majority in the Florida Supreme Court represent?
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/4 "2014-05-28T20:51:27Z")
> [@2sense](#):
>
> Which political party does the majority in the Florida Supreme Court represent?
[Of its seven justices](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Supreme_Court#Justices), two were appointed by Dem governors, four by Pubs, and one (Peggy Quince) was appointed simultaneously by outgoing Dem Lawton Chiles and incoming Pub Jeb Bush.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/5 "2014-05-28T21:38:30Z")
This part is bullshit:
> [@](#):
>
> The court ruled that records and emails of Pat Bainter and Gainesville-based Data Targeting – which was paid $6.2 million over the last three years by the Republican Party of Florida – are relevant to the trial. But “any disclosure or use of the documents must take place under seal in a courtroom closed to the public,” its 5-2 decision said.
Absolute, complete, 99 and 44/100ths pure bullshit.
Evidence in a trial should be 100 percent open to the public. Period.
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2014, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/6 "2014-05-28T22:34:41Z")
**Left Hand of Dorkness** , that’s similar to my proposal, except that the scoring algorithm I’d use is the total length of the district boundaries, and I’d let every legislator propose a map (in order of increasing seniority).
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/7 "2014-05-29T13:56:57Z")
I had been wondering what happened to these cases. The last thing I’d heard was that Scott had managed an end run around the amendments by refusing to submit them to the Justice Department for preclearance - but then that stopped being an issue with _Shelby County_.
> [@Frank](#):
>
> This part is bullshit:
>
> Absolute, complete, 99 and 44/100ths pure bullshit.
>
> Evidence in a trial should be 100 percent open to the public. Period.
Really? How about the testimony of a five-year-old victim in a child molestation case? Or the secret formula for Coke in a patent infringement case? Or (as here), documents which may be privileged or subject to qualified immunity and have to be inspected by the judge before a ruling on disclosure?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/8 "2014-05-29T14:37:28Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Or the secret formula for Coke in a patent infringement case?
Yup, absolutely. If Coke is trying to claim a patent on something based on their secret formula, then they need to give up their secrecy. That’s one of the fundamental requirements of patents.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/9 "2014-05-29T15:12:53Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#):
>
> I like my proposal: districts must be drawn with populations divided among districts as evenly as possible. The majority party draws the map. Some sort of inverse-square rule is applied (take the distance of each voter from the center of the district, square it, add 'em up, something like that) to form a total score. Submit for approval.
>
> The **minority** party may choose either to approve the map, OR to submit their own map that improves on the inverse-square score by at least 10%. If they can do so, their map goes into effect. If they can’t do so, the majority map goes into effect.
>
> Turn the partisan rancor to our benefit.
I would be totally good with this.
Since Chronos has brought up the minimize-length-of-boundaries alternative, I think the main advantages of each relative to the other are: minimizing the inverse square would be more precise, and the yardstick would be in terms of people, rather than geography itself. But minimizing the length of district boundaries is way more comprehensible to the average citizen.
Math geek advantage, least squares. Political advantage, minimizing boundaries. But either one would be a hell of a lot better than what we have now.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/10 "2014-05-29T15:14:12Z")
[Here’s](http://fairdistrictsnow.org/redistricting/is-it-over) [fairdistrictsnow.org](http://fairdistrictsnow.org)’s version of the background of the lawsuit.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/11 "2014-05-29T15:16:53Z")
> [@](#):
>
> The court ruled that records and emails of Pat Bainter and Gainesville-based Data Targeting – which was paid $6.2 million over the last three years by the Republican Party of Florida – are relevant to the trial. But “any disclosure or use of the documents must take place under seal in a courtroom closed to the public,” its 5-2 decision said.
I went to the link, hoping to find the justification for this, but found none. It makes no sense to me on the face of it that this apparently fairly key part of the trial should be under seal.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/12 "2014-05-29T15:22:19Z")
I always thought that there is an easy solution to the gerrymandering problem:
1. Have the legislature draw up the districts.
2. Draw, at random, a jury of 100 voters.
3. Present to them, on flash cards, the silhouettes of the districts. Just black blob on white paper, no position on the map or anything.
4. If the majority (51 out of 100) on any one district, based on the silhouette, decide that it is gerrymandered, go back to step 1.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/13 "2014-05-29T16:10:22Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#):
>
> I went to the link, hoping to find the justification for this, but found none. It makes no sense to me on the face of it that this apparently fairly key part of the trial should be under seal.
We don’t know if this is a key part of the trial yet. The GOP says the documents are subject to the [associational privilege](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1522241.html) (in which case they cannot be admitted into evidence) and the LOWV says they aren’t. No court has actually ruled on that issue yet.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/14 "2014-05-29T16:26:15Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> We don’t know if this is a key part of the trial yet. The GOP says the documents are subject to the [associational privilege](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1522241.html) (in which case they cannot be admitted into evidence) and the LOWV says they aren’t. No court has actually ruled on that issue yet.
Tru dat, but the part that I don’t get is, **if** they’re determined to not be covered by the privilege, and admitted into evidence as a result, then what’s the justification for the seal?
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/15 "2014-05-29T17:03:09Z")
There [won’t be any](http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2014/sc14-987.pdf).
> [@](#):
>
> …in granting the petition, we emphasize that this opinion is not a determination that these documents will be permanently under seal or that they are in fact protected by the associational privilege and should be shielded from the public.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/16 "2014-05-29T17:09:35Z")
> [@Frank](#):
>
> This part is bullshit:
>
> Absolute, complete, 99 and 44/100ths pure bullshit.
>
> Evidence in a trial should be 100 percent open to the public. Period.
Hyperbole? Or is that a literal claim?
Can I discover your trade secrets by suing you and issuing a subpoena that includes them?
Can my client accused of raping his 12-year-old niece force her to testify in open court to the acts that prove his guilt?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/17 "2014-05-29T17:58:41Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Can I discover your trade secrets by suing you and issuing a subpoena that includes them?
No, because the plaintiff doesn’t issue subpoenas; the court does.
> [@](#):
>
> Can my client accused of raping his 12-year-old niece force her to testify in open court to the acts that prove his guilt?
No, but the prosecution will probably have a harder time proving their case without that testimony.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/18 "2014-05-29T19:00:17Z")
What? The plaintiff can issue all the subpoenas he wants (though not _to a party_.)
---
### Author:  [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/19 "2014-05-29T21:19:23Z")
More and more I’m supporting the proportional representation model.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2014, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478/20 "2014-05-29T23:10:28Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> Or (as here), documents which may be privileged or subject to qualified immunity and have to be inspected by the judge before a ruling on disclosure?
So they’re not evidence until after that? When they are used as evidence, I would expect them to be public.
As to your other two questions, and to **Bricker** ’s, yes, evidence that is to considered in reaching a verdict in a trial should be public.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-redistricting-lawsuit/689478.md?page=2)