Full Breakdown
Florida’s 2026 Congressional Map Faces Court Challenge Over Alleged Partisan Gerrymandering
5/16/2026, 12:03:40 AM
Legal Challenge to Florida’s 2026 Congressional Map
On May 15, 2026, Judge Joshua Hawkes heard a lawsuit by Equal Ground, the Campaign Legal Center and Common Cause Florida seeking an injunction to block Florida’s new congressional map, approved on April 29, for allegedly violating the 2010 Fair Districts amendment.
Background: Fair Districts Amendment and Mid-Decade Redistricting
Florida voters ratified the Fair Districts amendment in 2010 with 63 % support, banning partisan gerrymandering and minority-vote dilution. In 2023-24, President Donald Trump urged Republican states to pursue mid-decade redistricting, prompting DeSantis’ special session.
Key Players
Governor Ron DeSantis and his office directed map-drawer Jason Pereda; Secretary of State Cord Byrd and General Counsel David Axelman defend the plan. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Christina Ford, Simone Leeper, Chris Shenton and Mohammad Jazil. Judge Joshua Hawkes presides.
Data & Impact
Republicans hold 20 of Florida’s 28 House seats; new map adds four GOP-leaning districts, projecting 24 Republican seats. Plaintiffs note 82 % of Republican voters stay in place versus 41 % of Democratic voters, suggesting reconfiguration. The shift could bolster President Donald Trump’s effort to preserve a narrow House majority in the 2026 midterms and test the durability of the Fair Districts amendment.
Official Statements & Responses
DeSantis’ counsel, Mohammad Jazil, argued Pereda’s testimony shows the map reflects shifts and that an injunction would disrupt the 2026 election schedule. General Counsel David Axelman said if the amendment’s racial-protection clause is invalid, Fair Districts ban should be struck down. Plaintiffs’ attorneys stress the admission of partisan data violates the amendment’s core purpose.
Criticism & Opposition
Plaintiffs argue the map’s partisan skew is unprecedented: 82 % of Republican voters remain in the same districts while only 41 % of Democratic voters do. Chris Shenton says the plan “targets Democrats and favors Republicans,” violating the amendment.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
DeSantis’ office asserts no racial data were used, yet the new map reshapes a southeastern district originally designed to help elect a Black representative under the Voting Rights Act. Plaintiffs view this as minority-vote dilution; the court has yet to decide the amendment’s racial-protection validity.
Verbatim Quotes
“This case is unusual because the map-drawer admitted on the public record that the districts were drawn with partisan data and without the need to comply with the” — Christina Ford, Attorney, Equal Ground
“Any level of improper partisan intent is too much,” — Simone Leeper, Attorney, Campaign Legal Center
“The reason the [new map] does that is because its goal is to target Democrats and favor Republicans,” — Chris Shenton, Attorney, Common Cause Florida
“Axelman further argued that if one part of the 2010 amendment is found unconstitutional, then the entire amendment, including its ban on partisan gerrymandering, should be considered invalid.” — David Axelman, General Counsel, Office of Governor Ron DeSantis
What’s Next
Judge Joshua Hawkes will issue a written ruling on the injunction request. The map stays in effect for the May 25 filing deadline, and the case could reach the Florida Supreme Court before the November 2026 elections.
