MIAMI – After being dealt a legal blow Friday in their efforts to keep a “racially gerrymandered” electoral map from being used in this November’s Miami city commission election, plaintiffs suing the city are taking their fight to the U.S. Supreme Court.
District Judge K. Michael Moore had thrown out the commission’s original and modified maps, which he said were unconstitutionally drawn along racial lines and split neighborhoods, ordering the city instead use a map drawn by the plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.
But a 2-1 decision Friday, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals granted the city of Miami’s motion for a stay on that ruling, meaning the city’s second proposed map will be in effect come November.
Now the ACLU is asking the Supreme Court to review the case and vacate the stay, preventing the city’s map from being used in November.
“Because of the City’s blatant disregard for constitutional principles concerning racial gerrymandering, this Court would likely grant review of an Eleventh Circuit decision upholding any such racial gerrymander,” its filing reads. “This Court should vacate the stay entered by the Eleventh Circuit. The Court should also grant an immediate administrative stay while it considers this emergency application.”
Read the full filing:
Following Saturday’s decision, legal analyst David Weinstein described the court’s ruling as an “unexpected setback” for the plaintiffs.
The appeals court ruling also means that Miguel Angel Gabela, District 1 Commissioner Alex Diaz de la Portilla’s challenger, will not be on the ballot for the District 1 race in November because his home of more than 20 years, he says, was “surgically” carved out of District 1 in the city’s June 14 map.
“We are going to challenge the disenfranchisement of his candidacy by this specific carve-out,” Gabela’s attorney David Winker said.
Winker added they are exploring all legal actions, “to ensure that he will be on the ballot in District 1.”
Miami City Attorney Victoria Mendez said in a statement that the city is monitoring the latest developments in court.
“We await direction from the Supreme Court of the United States,” she said. “We are not authorized to file a response unless and until SCOTUS orders us to file a response. We will let you know what develops.”
She previously said that adopting the plaintiffs’ new map “would have caused significant disruption and confusion to voters” and said that “justice was served” following the appeals court ruling.