Attorneys for felons trying to have their voting rights restored are accusing Gov. Rick Scott and the Florida Cabinet of “foot-dragging” by trying to block a federal judge’s order that gave the state until April 26 to revamp its controversial rights-restoration process.
A response filed Thursday by the plaintiffs’ lawyers in the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is the latest salvo in the case, filed last year on behalf of nine Florida felons.
In a series of harshly worded rulings, U.S. District Judge Mark Walker found the state’s vote-restoration process violated First Amendment rights and equal-protection rights of felons. He gave Scott, Attorney General Pam Bondi and the other members of the Florida Cabinet, who serve as the state’s Board of Executive Clemency, until April 26 to overhaul the process. Walker last week also rejected a request by Bondi to put his order on hold.
“Rather than comply with the requirements of the United States Constitution, defendants continue to insist they can do whatever they want with hundreds of thousands of Floridians’ voting rights and absolutely zero standards,” Walker wrote in a six-page decision April 4. “They ask this court to stay its prior orders. No.”
Arguing in part that Walker “relied on unsubstantiated insinuations of actual discrimination,” Bondi on April 6 asked the federal appellate court to put a stay on the district judge’s order.
But in the response filed with the appeals court Thursday, lawyers for the plaintiffs chided state officials for complaining that Walker hadn’t given them enough time to craft a new process.
“Now that the day has come to set forth a rule-based, non-arbitrary system, they pretend to be caught off guard and unprepared after a year of litigation and after more than two months have elapsed” since a Feb. 1 order by Walker that found the current process unconstitutional and instructed both sides to come up with an alternate system, the lawyers wrote.
The clemency board could immediately impose new rules that meet Walker’s requirements while continuing to appeal his decision, wrote lawyers from the Fair Elections Legal Network and the Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC firm, who filed the lawsuit last year on behalf of the plaintiffs.
“Instead, they chose to delay even after the district court found the current system unconstitutional on February 1, and now seek to benefit from their own foot-dragging,” the lawyers wrote.
In seeking a stay, Bondi’s lawyers said the state needs more time to answer a slew of questions regarding the vote-restoration process.
“The issue is not whether the board could unilaterally prescribe new rules in a short span of time … but whether the state’s policymakers and citizenry — including but not limited to the board — should be afforded sufficient time to carefully consider the important issues at hand,” they wrote.
The lawyers for the state also sought to demonstrate that the state’s vote-restoration process does not violate constitutional rights.
The process comports with the Equal Protection Clause if it “bears a rational relationship to the achieving of a legitimate state interest,” the state lawyers wrote, reiterating an argument rejected by Walker. The state has a legitimate interest in limiting the voting franchise to “responsible voters,” they added.
“The state’s totality-of-the-circumstances approach is rationally calculated to effectuate that interest, because it permits board members to ‘gauge the progress and rehabilitation of a convicted felon’ based on the full range of information concerning the ‘individual defendant and his case,’ “ they wrote.
But lawyers for the felons said the state shouldn’t be trusted.
“Appellants’ only goal appears to be to fight for a ruling sanctioning unfettered discretion in voting rights restoration,” they wrote.
The state threatened to do away with restoring voting rights altogether but has since backed down, the plaintiffs’ lawyers argued.
“In light of the harms inherent in such a system, and because appellants could adopt an interim scheme now, they have no cognizable injury that would merit a stay,” they wrote.
But the state argued that the clemency board hasn’t shown it will ignore Walker’s order.
Walker “did not find or suggest that defendants are likely to disregard its rulings and set up a new vote-restoration system incompatible with the requirements of its order,” Bondi’s lawyers wrote.
“Accordingly, the ‘drastic and extraordinary remedy’ of an injunction is not required,” they wrote.
Restoration of voting rights has long been a controversial legal and political issue in Florida. After taking office in 2011, Scott and Bondi played key roles in changing the process to effectively make it harder for felons to get their rights restored.
Under the current process, felons must wait five or seven years after their sentences are complete to apply to have rights restored. After applications are filed, the process can take years to complete.
A political committee known as Floridians for a Fair Democracy has collected enough petition signatures to place a measure on the November general-election ballot that, if approved by voters, would automatically restore voting rights to felons who have served their sentences, completed parole or probation and paid restitution. Murderers and sex offenders would be excluded under the measure, which will appear on the ballot as Amendment 4.
–Dara Kam, News Service of Florida
Call it what it is… walks like a duck, talks like a duck… voter suppression. Taxation without representation. You pay taxes, you vote. Simple as that. Florida is one of the few states that doesn’t get it.
Just like your credit… 7 years after all time, penalties, fines and supervision met and the record is expunged. Voter rolls are updated automatically and voter registration card shows up in the mail to the same address your tax refund goes.
Why are murderers and sex offenders omitted. If they do the time, complete their probation and pay restitution, why are they treated differently than other criminals? Are we not suppose to receive equal justice under the law?
those felons gave up their rights when they committed felonies – they don’t deserve to vote, just as they don’t deserve to ever be able to possess or carry a firearm
“Hard on criminals” Republicans don’t expect to receive ex felon’s vote in an election.
It makes no difference how you get 50% + 1 vote to remain in power.
They’re treated different because they are. They should not be allowed to vote for laws they are so ready to break.
Easy to see that Republicans will do anything to keep reformed felons from exercising their constitutional right to vote once they have satisfied all conditions of their rehabilitation. Also easy to see that “forgiveness” apparently only applies to Republican liars, cheats, thieves and abusers. Hypocrisy is the only value left to the Republican Party.
r&r, our elected officials can vote for laws. You and I vote for our “represantation” in the law making process.
Let’s not forget all the people who received trumped up charges and got felonies they didn’t deserve, and felons can own guns as long as they go three the right steps. You pay taxes ,you get to vote, THAT IS THE AMERICA I REMEMBER, it’s nice to see Florida finally starting to get straightened out.
In other states they get their rights restored why not here? How many people who are not incarcerated commit crimes and vote !! They are still citizens and should be able to vote .. They’ve paid their debt now let them live .
Let’s say nearly a decade ago a dumb 19 year old was on a construction zone getting scrap wood from the dumpster and was charged with a felony. The person was sentenced to felony probation. They completed probation in half the time by completing all community service, paid fines off and everything. Then this same person started a business of their own, has a family, owns a home, pays taxes, never been in trouble since, does not drink, does not smoke, never had a speeding ticket….ever…yet this productive tax paying member of society is not allowed to vote. Why? Yeah you can say there is a process to have civil rights reinstated..it nas been a decade so far and this person is still waiting. Ps not all “ex felons” are democrat welfare recipients wanting to vote to keep free stuff going to lazy people. Some want to vote for the leaders who lower taxes so we…..they..can provide for their families.
This is by definition taxation without representation. If you serve your time and pay taxes, you should have the right to vote in an election
Because Governor Scott is only looking out for his best interest. Never Children and families even. He needs to be impeached, two terms in a row, that had to be achieved via FRAUD. Oh which by the way is a non-violent crime imagine that! Praying, he does not make it to the Senate office to replace Bill Nelson.