On Wednesday, April 10, federal Judge K. Michael Moore ruled that the City of Miami redistricting plan, passed in March 2022 and disputed ever since, is unconstitutional and must be replaced by a new plan and district map.
Moore’s decision marks a major turning point in the legal tug-of-war between the City of Miami, the ACLU of Florida, and a local coalition including Grove Rights and Community Equity (GRACE), the NAACP, Engage Miami, West Grove community leader Clarice Cooper, and others.
The ACLU of Florida argued successfully that the city’s district maps were racially gerrymandered. In an 83-page opinion, Judge Moore agreed, citing numerous instances in which city commissioners clearly demonstrated that, when deciding district boundaries in 2022 and again in 2023, they were motivated above all by race.
“Over the course of six Commission meetings, the Commissioners repeatedly instructed [their consultant] to design a map containing three majority Hispanic, one majority Black, and one plurality ‘Anglo’ district. More than any other consideration, this objective was of paramount importance,” the judge found.
And that, Judge Moore concluded, was unconstitutional. “By sorting its citizens based on race, the City reduced Miamians to no more than their racial backgrounds, thereby denying them the equal protection of the laws that the Fourteenth Amendment promises.”
Going forward, Judge Moore permanently enjoined the city from “calling, conducting, supervising, or certifying any elections under the unconstitutional districts.”
Starting now, Miami’s electoral redistricting will be controlled by Judge Moore’s district court. A next step will be a status conference to discuss potential remedies, including but not limited to the imposition of special elections and a new district map. Many people close to the dispute believe that a final district map is not likely to take effect until the November 2025 municipal election.
During the two years since the initial adoption of the redistricting map, a principal factor slowing the process was the numerous judgments and appeals.
Since then, the makeup and tenor of the City Commission has changed significantly. Whether the City will appeal the judge’s latest decision is not yet known.
If the City does not appeal the decision, political insiders speculate that Miami’s redistricting might go in a number of different directions. They could include a new district map, special elections later this year for all five commission seats, an expanded commission (community advocates have called repeatedly to expand the city to seven or nine districts, which would require a vote to change the city charter), a return to at-large seats, and a loss of diversity on the Commission dais.
Before 1997, Miami voters elected their commissioners citywide. Then the City adopted the five electoral districts that have continued, with minor variations, until today. One of the goals of the 1997 restructuring, current Miami commissioners readily admit, was to diversify the commission’s makeup.
Miami is approximately three-quarters Hispanic. The “racial gerrymandering” established in 1997 was designed to ensure that three seats on the commission would be Hispanic, one Black, and one “Anglo.”
“We’re thrilled with the judge’s ruling,” says Clarice Cooper, a GRACE board member and an individual plaintiff in the case. “This has given us an opportunity to see that we really need more districts in our city so that everybody can be adequately represented. It’s also an opportunity for Coconut Grove to be unified again, or at least for the redistricting to be done fairly.”
Under the plan in effect until Judge Moore’s latest decision, Coconut Grove was divided into two districts—most of the Grove in District 2, but a large part of the North Grove in District 3.
“Today is another win for democracy and equal representation,” said Nicholas Warren, staff attorney with the ACLU of Florida. “We look forward to another remedial process that finally ensures voters can choose their representatives, rather than politicians choosing their voters.”
There can be no doubt that the political climate in Miami, tainted by the numerous scandals of the past year, is changing. At its April 11 meeting, the City Commission voted 4-1 to remove City Attorney Victoria Méndez from her position immediately. She will play a transitional role in the City Attorney’s office while the search continues for her replacement. Méndez was a central figure in the redistricting disputes of the last two years, leading the charge for the City.
During the emotional discussion that led to the final vote on Méndez’ position, Commissioner Damian Pardo, who made the motion to remove Méndez earlier than previously agreed, said, “I personally do not have confidence in the information I receive [from you].” Commissioner Miguel Gabella left no doubt why, in his mind, a vote was needed. “I think you’ve been doing a bad job,” he said, “and every time I ask you a question, I don’t trust you.”
Download Judge Moore’s opinion, which presents a detailed background of the case, here. Links to a PDF
Visit the ACLU’s update on the decision here.
Read One Grove’s announcement and petition here.
