Florida elections officials are moving ahead to comply with a federal judge’s order that could pave the way for hundreds of thousands of felons to register and vote without paying court-ordered fines and restitution, even as Gov. Ron DeSantis initiated an appeal of the ruling on Friday.
Florida Division of Elections Director Maria Matthews sent a memo Wednesday advising county supervisors of elections about U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle’s decision overturning major parts of a 2019 law requiring felons to pay “legal financial obligations” — fines, fees, costs and restitution associated with their convictions — to be eligible to vote.
Matthews’ email to the county elections officials included a summary of Hinkle’s decision and told them “to review the order in its entirety.”
The disputed 2019 law was aimed at implementing a 2018 constitutional amendment that restored voting rights to felons “who have completed all terms of their sentences, including parole and probation,” excluding murderers and people convicted of sexual felonies.
Hinkle had already ruled in October that it is unconstitutional for the state to bar felons who are “genuinely unable to pay” their court-ordered debts from voting. He also told the state to develop a process to determine whether felons had outstanding financial obligations and were unable to pay the costs.
But after the state failed to come up with a procedure, Hinkle issued a rare weekend order Sunday laying out specific guidelines for elections officials to follow to ensure that Floridians who have served their time behind bars but can’t afford to pay the obligations are able to cast ballots.
Hinkle, in part, created a form for felons who are unsure if they have court-ordered debts or who cannot afford to pay to seek an “advisory opinion” from state elections officials.
Hinkle’s ruling also banned the state from using a voter-registration form that was part of the 2019 law, finding that the form violated the National Voting Registration Act. The form included three checkboxes addressing felony convictions.
“Please remove any links to this form from your website and link solely” to an earlier version of the form, Matthews wrote in Wednesday’s email to the elections supervisors. The older form includes a checkbox that says, “I affirm that I am not a convicted felon, or if I am, my right to vote has been restored.”
As of Friday, the state Division of Elections website still included links to the form the judge decided is unconstitutional.
Matthews’ message to the supervisors also said the Division of Elections and county elections officials must make available online and in hard copy a “statement of rules governing eligibility to vote after a felony conviction” crafted by Hinkle and part of his order.
“We are currently reviewing internally and finalizing the requisite advisory opinion request form to be made available to you and online as soon as possible. Spanish translated documents will also be provided,” Matthews, a lawyer, wrote. “We are also reviewing our options, and further guidance as to this order will be forthcoming as needed and if anything changes.”
Polk County Supervisor of Elections Lori Edwards told The News Service of Florida she is complying with Hinkle’s order, but his forms need to be tweaked.
The request for an advisory opinion includes lines for people to identify their street addresses and email addresses but does not include a line for the requesters’ names, Edwards said.
And the standards for voting eligibility do not have the Division of Election’s website, which by Friday included information about felons’ rights to advisory opinions and a link to the form.
Edwards said she highlighted the glitches to Matthews’ office.
“If they don’t fix it, I’ll fix it,” Edwards said Friday.
People who fit the criteria laid out by Hinkle do not have to seek advisory opinions to register to vote, Edwards said.
“Nobody has to ask for an advisory opinion. It’s there to alleviate concerns of people who feel they may be in the gray area and don’t know what to do,” she said.
Many people who have spent time in prison are “trying to be so careful,” Edwards said.
“They don’t want to make a mistake,” she added.
The process devised by the judge means the vast majority of more than 770,000 Florida felons who have outstanding financial obligations will be eligible to vote without taking any action.
Under the order, felons who were eligible for court-appointed attorneys at the time they were last convicted of felonies are considered unable to pay the financial obligations and can register and vote. Felons whose court-ordered financial judgments were converted to civil liens, a process that frequently occurs prior to incarceration, also are deemed unable to pay, making them eligible to register and vote. And felons who submit financial affidavits that would be sufficient to establish indigent status by a court are also considered unable to pay, and thus eligible to cast ballots.
DeSantis and his administration have fiercely defended the 2019 law, and on Friday filed a notice saying the state intends to appeal Hinkle’s decision.
The governor on Tuesday said the federal judge’s ruling was expected.
“That was obvious from the beginning. It’ll go to 11th Circuit and we’ll see how it shakes out there,” DeSantis, referring to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, told reporters.
–Dara Kam, News Service of Florida
FlaglerLive relies on a strong core of donors. But they’re just a fraction of the 25,000 readers who daily depend on FlaglerLive for reliable, fearless reporting and analysis you cannot get anywhere else. If you’re still on the sidelines, we need you to join the Friends of FlaglerLive today. Elections, storms, the latest catastrophe - when dependable and factual local reporting will be more essential than ever, take a stand for integrity and have a direct voice in fostering serious journalism in your community. As little as $10 makes a difference, or better still, become a monthly donor: Become a "Friend of" FlaglerLive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit news organization. Donations are tax deductible. Think of it as buying a "scoop", in every sense of the term!
Reader Interactions
Comments
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Merrill S Shapiro says
“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” —Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
CB from PC says
The Constitution of the United States gives the authority to individual States to either permit or deny convicted criminals of the right to vote.
The voters of the State of Florida granted Felons the right to vote provided they complied with all terms of parole and probation including restitution and fines.
Federal Judge Hinkle overruled the will of the citizens of Florida on the grounds this was a poll tax.
Actually, it is not a tax because it is not applied to all citizens equally. As was the ACA penalty imposed by Congress for failing to have ACA compliant health insurance.
Paying fines and restitution is a court ordered term of post-release conditions specific to each individual case. Like any of the other conditions of release, probation, bail or parole, failure to comply can result in a contempt of court charge and prison.
So…seeing as the Judge wants to violate the rights of the citizens of Florida, we need to urge our legislators to put pressure on the County Clerks of Courts to start issuing warrants for the arrest of individuals violating their condition of release by failing to pay court ordered fines and restitution, unless they have filed for bankruptcy.
The other option is to rewrite the Amendment and put it up for voting in next election.
If law-abiding people of all races are not fed up with their rights being violated after the looting and destruction of this past week, they never will be.
Take a look at the future folks, coming right at you.
coyote says
“The voters of the State of Florida granted Felons the right to vote provided they complied with all terms of parole and probation …….. including restitution and fines.”
Except that the ” including restitution and fines” part was added by you, and does NOT appear anywhere on the amendment ….
“Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any disqualification from voting arising from a felony conviction shall terminate and voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence including parole or probation.
(b) No person convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense shall be qualified to vote until restoration of civil rights.”
CB from PC says
What part of ” all terms of their sentence including parole or probation.” do you not understand?
If fines and restitution are included in the “terms of their sentence” then they must be paid.
Let me explain it another way.
You make a purchase. The item costs $10. You give the clerk $10. But you cannot take the item because you have not paid the additional sales tax. Understand?
Concerned Citizen says
But what about the victims of crimes? And their rights?
All this static about felons rights. But do victims get a do over at a new life?
If you commit a crime against someone and are ordered to pay restitution it’s part of the sentencing. Therefore if you fail to pay said restitution your sentencing IS NOT complete. It’s plain and simple. Why should you get your rights restored IF sentencing isn’t complete? It’s not a “poll tax” or anything else you want to whine and call it. That felon committed a crime against someone and cost them money.
About 6 or 7 years ago my home was burglarized by repeat offenders out on probation. The house was secured so they smashed a sliding glass door” not just a simple window”. They took various items and left a mess. Some of those items were sentimental and could not be replaced.
Both perps were known to law enforcement and the courts. Both were just out of a recent stint in jail and serving probation. So in the course of mine and 2 others burglary they were found re-arrested and sent back to prison. All the while I’m left with hundreds of dollars of repair that I was responsible for.Along with having my sense of safety and security violated. Not a nice feeling I can assure you. Fastforward 6 years later I haven’t seen any of that “restitution” and probably never will.
So I ask. After you willingly victimized me. Then left me in debt why should you get a do over.?When your sentencing isn’t complete?
Percy's mother says
Sadly, victims of crimes don’t have rights (in this country)
The rights of criminals take precedent over those of victims.
This is the reality in this country these days.
Sooner or later people will wake up, either by opening their eyes or via a major political event such as that which happened during and after the Bolshevik Revolution
Mike Cocchiola says
Republicans will fight on to restrict the vote. If DeSantis loses an appeal the fight will probably move on to obstruction and intimidation. Anything to keep potential Democratic voters from the polls. The thing is, though, former felons may just reflect the rest of the state and be split between Democrat, Republican and NPA. Persistent Republican attempts to deny them voting privileges are misguided at best and undemocratic at worst.
CB from PC says
Mike, we all know this is just another “insurance policy” for Democrats to hopefully win the 2020 election.
After all, the phony dossier promoted as an “insurance policy” by corrupt FBI agent Strzok and right up to Obama didn’t work in the 2016 election. Talk about “doing anything”.
Richard says
I guess consequences handed out by judges for unlawful conduct will no longer be a deterrent to crime now as deemed by another judge. So much for judges having integrity and upholding the “rule of law”. No wonder our country is currently under siege by home grown terrorists, criminals and thugs. They know that they won’t be held accountable. This country is headed for another civil war but it won’t be the Red Coats versus the Blue Coats. It will be the millions of law abiding citizens versus those terrorists, thugs and criminals who believe there are no longer ANY consequences for unlawful actions.
Florida Voter says
Voting is absolutely fundamental to our American freedoms and the American society.
Should money keep you from voting? Does your right to vote depend on your income? When criminals are sent to jail or prison, our justice system is removing them from society. After they serve their term and are allowed to rejoin the American society, they should be allowed to rejoin the most fundamental levels of our society.
CB from PC says
Read the text of what was voted into law by the citizens of Florida.
coyote says
As I have already pointed out to you, there is/are ZERO provisions in the amendment regarding financial restitution.
This was another attempt (no means the 1st or last) by the Florida legislation to bypass the actual intent of the amendment by placing restrictive requirements on a constituent-approved amendment.
Maybe YOU should go read the amendment again (or maybe for the 1st time?):
“Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any disqualification from voting arising from a felony conviction shall terminate and voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence including parole or probation.
(b) No person convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense shall be qualified to vote until restoration of civil rights.”
Where do you see anything about restitution and/or fines?
Florida Voter says
Please read my original comment. I didn’t make any comments on what the law is or how it should be interpreted.
I had two points: 1) the question regarding if money should be a qualification to be able to vote “Should money keep you from voting? Does your right to vote depend on your income?” 2) a statement that when people are released from prison/jail and allowed to reintegrate into our society, that should include the most fundamental tenets of our society.
Percy's mother says
A May 2018 U.S. Department of Justice report on state prisoner recidivism followed a sample of the 412,731 prisoners released by 30 states in 2005 – about 77% of all state prisoners released that year. Of those releasees, 89% were male, 18% were under age 24 and 54% were between 25 and 39. Blacks and whites each made up about 40% of the releasees. Of the entire study group, 32% had been convicted of drug offenses, 30% of property offenses, 26% of violent crimes and 13% of public order offenses.
Overall, almost 45% of the former prisoners were arrested within one year of release; 16% were arrested for the first time in the second year, 8% in the third, 11% in years four to six and 4% in years seven to nine. Thus, about 68% were arrested within three years, 79% within six years and 83% in nine years.
Pogo says
@Speaking of recidivism
Be sure to include serial white collar criminal shitheads like trump (or a certain erstwhile “health care executive” who resembles a mutant eel) when blathering about repeat offenders. Perhaps give a thought to the crimes of the corporate poisoners, polluters, murder-by-knowingly-selling death traps killers; and behold ‘murica’s international corporate conglomerates’ gifts to the world: fast food, sugar and carbonated water, a pandemic of diabetes, the world’s leaders in tobacco sales, a pandemic of cancer, or ‘murica’s preeminence in selling arms (often in the form of foreign aid which in reality is just store credit with our defense contractors) and thus the squandering of all hope for life and progress – in service to futile and suicidal arms races.
oldtimer says
My son was murdered here after he came back from serving our country, that’s a life sentence for the family his murderer will be out in 25yrs, does anyone care about our sentence?
CB from PC says
We care about your sentence. Our deepest sympathy for the loss of your son. Ours did 2 tours in Iraq. To have him serve, and then die when home is horrible. Now, a certain political Party is attempting to use this criminal bloc to keep themselves in office. Hell, the party has nothing to offer people who realize self-motivation, legitimate hard work and perseverance is how you succeed.
coyote says
“Now, a certain political Party is attempting to use this criminal bloc to keep themselves in office. Hell, the party has nothing to offer people who realize self-motivation, legitimate hard work and perseverance is how you succeed.”
Are you describing the Republican (actually, now it’s the Trumpeteer) party?
You know the old adage “if the shoe fits …..” – and your above description fits Trump better than anyone else.
James Manfre says
People who commit crimes are already penalized by the arrest conviction and sentence of the crime. Penalizing people by taking away their voting rights or their driver’s licenses makes no sense. The criminal justice system is intended to be punitive and rehabilitative. The better society is in creating a path back to a lawful and productive life the less incident of reoffending takes place. Florida is an outlier in removing a person’s right to vote after a felony conviction. Amendment four which allowed felons to reregister did not include the requirement to pay all fines and restitution. The law was passed by the legislature. The judge’s ruling does not do away with the responsibility to pay fines and restitution by the person. It only relieves the indigent person from paying fines and restitution to reregister.
Land of no turn signals says says
Associating Democrats with felons interesting.
Jane Gentile-Youd says
Has anyone bothered to order a certain amount of community service in lieu of fines if fines were included in the original sentencing? It costs us taxpayers untold dollars to house a person in jail. We pay for their food, their shelter, and they are now required to full health care – just look at Flagler County published expenses ( on line for every commission to approve) for ‘indigent care’ paid to top doctors and hospitals for those in jail. What about the cost for the guards, food, even libraries . No wonder so many people find it cheaper to live in jail than outside.
If restitution is part of a requirement of a sentence and if the released prisoner does not have the funds then require them to do community service for jobs which would otherwise pay a salary until their obligations are met.
I do not think this has anything to do with either party it has to do with justice to the taxpayers and especially the uncompensated victims of crimes committed.