Florida State House Speaker and other legislators are retaliating through electoral reforms against Florida Supreme Court because of a court decision

From a Florida Initiative for Electoral Reform press release, which doesn't offer reader commenting:

"The sudden charge by State House Speaker Dean Cannon and other legislators to drastically reform Florida’s Supreme Court is a poorly disguised attempt at retaliation towards the judicial branch. The Florida Supreme Court’s disqualification of Amendment 7 from the 2010 ballot made it a target for legislators who seek to protect gerrymandering and derail the Fair Districts amendments, approved by over 62% of voters. The specific aim of Amendment 7 was for it to be simultaneously approved along with Amendments 5 and 6, thereby essentially overriding them. Speaker Dean Cannon personally argued the case for the counter amendment during the court hearing. Ultimately, the court decided to uphold a lower court decision to strike Amendment 7 off the ballot for being misleading to voters. Not coincidentally, Cannon is now leading the effort to break up the court into two separate civil and criminal courts while also requiring justices to obtain 60% of the vote to win merit retention, as opposed to the current simple majority. 
Opposition to this retaliatory “reform” comes from the fact that a well financed minority could effectively hold judges hostage to obtaining the 60% needed for retention. The higher rate of turnover would create more flexibility for the executive branch and its allies in the legislature to appoint agenda friendly judges, regardless of which of the two parties hold the power. This would undermine the impartiality of justice and the independence of the judicial branch. ... 

Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, removing regulations on spending by moneyed special interests on ads in support of or against candidates, this retaliatory “reform” of Florida’s Supreme Court will further the effects of plutocracy at the expense of impartial justice. The passive, open acceptance and attempted rationalization of such measures by legislators highlights the unrepresentative nature of the existing system and the continuing need for electoral reform."

 
Remember, "voting turnout and activism means spreading the word!"