Feed aggregator

Florida Republicans scored a significant legal win on Wednesday when the state’s Supreme Court ruled that newly drawn congressional districts can be used in this year’s midterm elections, boosting GOP efforts to protect and potentially expand their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The lawsuit challenging the map was brought by a group of voters who argued that the new district boundaries violated Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering. They asked the court to block the revised map and require the state to use the congressional districts employed in the last election.

In a 6-1 ruling, the Florida Supreme Court rejected the request for an emergency injunction. The justices did not address the underlying legal questions, instead concluding that the case must continue working its way through lower courts before they can intervene.

Republicans currently control 20 of Florida’s 28 congressional seats. Political observers say the new districts, approved after a special legislative session and signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, could position the GOP to gain as many as four additional seats in the upcoming election.

The ruling also removes uncertainty for prospective candidates as the state approaches Friday’s filing deadline for participation in Florida’s Aug. 18 congressional primaries.

Republican Attorney General James Uthmeier celebrated the outcome, describing it on social media as a “complete and total victory.”

Opponents of the map reacted with anger but pledged to continue pursuing the case through the courts, even if a final resolution does not arrive until after multiple election cycles.

“The Florida Supreme Court’s failure to stop this brazen partisan power grab is not only an assault on democracy, but an abdication of its duty to the people of Florida,” said Genesis Robinson, executive director of Equal Ground, a community organizing group that sued.

Florida is among several Republican-controlled states that have revisited congressional boundaries between census cycles as part of a broader effort by President Donald Trump and GOP leaders to maintain control of the House in November.

State lawmakers approved the new congressional map on April 29, the same day the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a majority-Black congressional district in Louisiana. Although the ruling had not yet been issued when DeSantis called the special legislative session, his administration anticipated that outcome.

Officials in the governor’s office have maintained that race played no role in the creation of the map presented to lawmakers. One notable change redraws a South Florida district that the administration said had originally been designed to help elect a Black member of Congress in accordance with the federal Voting Rights Act.

Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment, adopted by voters in 2010, not only prohibits partisan gerrymandering but also bars the drawing of districts in ways that weaken the electoral influence of racial or language minorities. The amendment further requires districts to remain compact and, when practical, follow existing political and geographic boundaries.

In guidance provided to legislators, DeSantis General Counsel David Axelman argued that the racial provisions of the Fair Districts Amendment conflict with the U.S. Constitution. Axelman contended that if those provisions are unconstitutional, then the entire amendment—including its anti-gerrymandering protections—cannot stand.

Lawyers representing state officials advanced similar arguments before the Florida Supreme Court. They also maintained that altering district boundaries at this stage would create significant election-related complications and that there was insufficient time to revert to the previous map.

In court filings, attorneys for the state praised the new districts, calling them “cause for celebration” during America’s 250th anniversary. “Perhaps for the first time in Florida’s history, the State has a truly colorblind map; a map that refuses to assault the dignity of men and women by color-coding them,” their court filing said.

Attorneys challenging the map countered that the districts were intentionally designed to favor Republicans. In their filings, they described the plan as “among the most extreme partisan gerrymanders enacted in any state over the past half-century.”

According to attorney Chris Shenton, who represents Common Cause and other groups opposing the map, the changes disproportionately affect Democratic voters. He noted that 82% of voters currently living in Republican-held districts remain in the same districts under the new map, while only 41% of voters in Democratic-held districts remain within their previous district boundaries.

{Matzav.com}

The Trump administration is moving rapidly to build the president’s proposed 250-foot triumphal arch near Arlington National Cemetery, with newly disclosed federal planning documents revealing an ambitious goal of finishing the massive structure within the next two to three years.

Records released by the National Park Service indicate that the White House intends to keep construction underway for up to 20 hours each day throughout the year, operating two separate 10-hour shifts. Industry professionals told The Washington Post that such an intensive schedule is rarely seen on federal projects that are not responding to emergencies.

By accelerating the construction process, administration officials hope to ensure the monument is completed before President Trump leaves office.

The proposed arch would rise at Memorial Circle, the prominent traffic circle adjacent to Arlington National Cemetery, and would represent one of the most dramatic changes to the capital’s landscape during Trump’s presidency.

Planning documents show that the structure would be built using concrete covered with granite rather than being carved entirely from natural stone, a technique experts say could significantly reduce construction time compared with many of Washington’s historic memorials.

“He’s obviously in a hurry to try to get this all done before he leaves office,” University of Maryland architecture professor Matthew Bell told the Post. “Most of the major monuments in D.C. are stone.”

According to Park Service filings, the project would require several massive cranes during construction, including one reaching roughly 320 feet and another approaching 300 feet in height.

The location has also drawn attention because it lies beneath an active flight corridor used by aircraft arriving at and departing from Reagan National Airport.

As a result, the Federal Aviation Administration is evaluating the impact the towering monument could have on air traffic. In an initial assessment released last week, the agency said the structure would need flashing red warning lights visible to pilots during nighttime operations. FAA officials confirmed Tuesday that their review has not yet been completed.

Administration representatives have stated that construction will move forward as soon as all regulatory approvals are secured.

“The Triumphal Arch in Memorial Circle is going to be one of the most iconic landmarks not only in Washington, D.C., but throughout the world,” White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement.

Trump has repeatedly championed the monument as a centerpiece of America’s upcoming 250th anniversary celebrations. The proposal has already won approval from the Commission of Fine Arts, and the National Capital Planning Commission could take up the matter for final consideration as soon as next month.

Opposition to the project remains strong among a number of preservation organizations and veterans groups, many of whom argue that the monument would permanently alter the character of the area surrounding Arlington National Cemetery.

Several military veterans have already gone to court in an effort to stop the project, contending that the new structure would fundamentally change the experience of visiting the nation’s most revered military cemetery.

The Society of Architectural Historians has likewise voiced objections to the proposal.

In a recent letter sent to the National Capital Planning Commission, the group’s conservation committee argued that the arch “threatens to negatively impact the historic and architectural context of its setting, disrupts views to existing significant historic monuments, and runs counter to decades of design and preservation guidance for this area that has been prepared by none other than the applicant itself.”

As part of the approval process, the National Park Service last week launched a 10-day public comment period, allowing members of the public to weigh in before construction begins. Feedback may be submitted online or by email through June 15.

Administration officials have pledged that the public will receive a minimum of two weeks’ notice before any construction activity starts at the site.

{Matzav.com}