PRELIMINARY STATEMENT TO ASSIST THE READER Consistent with naming conventions this Court has been using, the following shorthand terms are used for this Court’s prior decisions regarding constitutional challenges to the 2012 apportionment process: Apportionment I – In re Senate Joint Resolution of Legislative Apportionment 1176, 83 So. 3d 597 (Fla. 2012) (validating state house plan and invalidating state senate plan) Apportionment II – In re Senate Joint Resolution of Legislative Apportionment 2–B, 89 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 2012) (validating second state senate plan) Apportionment III – Fla. House of Representatives v. League of Women Voters of Fla., 118 So. 3d 198 (Fla. 2013) (allowing fact-based challenge to state senate plan) Apportionment IV – League of Women Voters of Fla. v. Fla. House of Representatives, 132 So. 3d 135, 137 (Fla. 2013) (holding that need to obtain in discovery legislative communications regarding reapportionment process was so compelling as to outweigh claim of legislative privilege) Apportionment V – League of Women Voters of Fla. v. Data Targeting, Inc., 140 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 2014) (granting all writs relief to allow evidence obtained regarding legislative intent to be used during trial pending appeal over whether evidence was privileged) Apportionment VI – Bainter v. League of Women Voters of Fla., No. SC141200, 2014 WL 5856169 (Fla. Nov. 13, 2014) (finding that any claim of privilege for evidence at issue in Apportionment V had been waived) Citations to the Record on Appeal are as follows: • (R__:___) indicate citations to the Record on Appeal previously filed in Bainter v. League of Women Voters of Fla., No. SC14-1200. This Court granted Appellants’ Motion to Utilize that record in this appeal by order dated October 31, 2014; • (SR(1-24):___) indicate citations to the Supplemental Record on Appeal filed by the clerk of the lower tribunal, also pursuant to this Court’s order, of materials filed since the Bainter record was comviii