Panel of Federal Judges Asks Tough Questions About Florida Measure on Felon Voting Rights

January 29, 2020by Lawrence Mower, Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times Tallahassee Bureau (TNS)
Moments after Desmond Meade registered to vote under Amendment 4, his family and friends gathered for celebration at the Orange County Florida Supervisor of Elections office on Jan. 8, 2018. (Sara Espedido/Orlando Sentinel/TNS)

ATLANTA — Three federal judges hearing a legal challenge to a Florida measure allowing felons to vote asked tough questions of the attorney for Gov. Ron DeSantis on Tuesday, repeatedly asking about the fairness of a subsequent bill that levied what critics called a “poll tax.”

The questioning by the judges for the U.S. District Court of Appeals in Atlanta went to the heart of the battle over Amendment 4, which voters passed in 2018. The justices appeared critical of the requirement passed by the Legislature last year that felons pay back all court fees, fines and restitution to victims before being allowed to vote.

The tacked-on legislative requirement will likely prevent hundreds of thousands of felons from voting because they can’t afford to immediately pay back what is often $500 or more in fees.

The judges sharply questioned DeSantis’ attorney, Pete Patterson, about how the law essentially creates two classes of felons: those who can afford to pay and those who can’t.

“Isn’t it punitive to say, ‘I will re-enfranchise this group, but not re-enfranchise this group’?” Judge Stanley Marcus asked. Marcus was U.S. attorney in Miami from 1982-85 and a federal judge in Florida until 1997 when he was named to the Court of Appeals.

Patterson responded that when 64.5% of Florida voters approved Amendment 4, the measure restored the right to vote to nearly all felons who completed “all terms of sentence,” which he said included the financial obligations.

Judge Lanier Anderson noted that under Patterson’s and the bill’s interpretation of Amendment 4, two felons could receive the exact same punishment for the exact same crime, yet one might vote before the other if he or she has more money.

“It’s precisely the same situation, except for punishment on the basis of poverty,” Anderson said.

“In one case, justice has been done,” Patterson responded. “In the other case, it has not.”

The court was hearing an appeal from DeSantis, a Republican who opposed Amendment 4, and Secretary of State Laurel Lee, who hoped to stop a U.S. district judge’s preliminary injunction in October.

That judge, Robert Hinkle, ruled that state officials must allow 17 felons who sued the state to register to vote. Patterson told the appellate judges that allowing the 17 to vote when they had not fulfilled “all terms of sentence” would cause an “irreparable harm” to the state and to other voters.

The judges are expected to rule in the coming weeks on whether to overturn Hinkle’s injunction.

Julie Ebenstein, a senior attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said she did not want to predict how the appellate judges would rule. But she noted the sharp line of questioning.

“The judges seemed very concerned about the irrationality of preventing someone from voting on the basis of their lack of wealth, when they were unable to pay,” Ebenstein said.

Amendment 4 overturned Florida’s 150-year-old law that banned felons from voting. The amendment restored the right to vote to nearly all felons who completed “all terms of sentence, including parole or probation.”

The historic amendment was celebrated as the nation’s greatest expansion of voting rights in decades, with up to 1.4 million felons believed to be enfranchised. Florida was one of just a handful of states that had not repealed its Jim Crow-era laws meant to keep black Americans from voting.

But almost as quickly, Amendment 4 became mired in confusion and debate, partly of its creators’ own doing.

At DeSantis’ urging, GOP lawmakers passed a law months later that applied some of the strictest terms possible to the amendment.

The resulting law, Senate Bill 7066, returned the right to vote only for those felons who were able to first pay all court fees, fines and restitution to victims. Other states allow felons to vote as they’re paying those fees over time.

For at least hundreds of thousands of felons, the new restrictions meant they would not be able to vote for years, if ever. Court fees often reach $1,000 or more, a considerable sum for felons who already have trouble finding work.

Court fines can be tens of thousands of dollars. And one felon told lawmakers that she owed $59 million in restitution to insurance companies, almost certainly guaranteeing she’ll never be able to vote.

Republican lawmakers were denounced nationally for creating a “poll tax,” but they justified the harsh terms in the bill by citing the words of the amendment’s own creators.

University of Florida attorney Jon Mills, who co-wrote the amendment, told the Supreme Court that “all terms” included financial obligations. The amendment did not define “all terms.”

Earlier this month, the Florida Supreme Court agreed that “all terms” included the financial obligations.

Civil rights groups sued as soon as Senate Bill 7066 became law, arguing that it was unconstitutional. In October, Hinkle wrote that he also agreed that “all terms” included the financial obligations.

However, citing an 11th U.S. Circuit Court opinion signed by eight judges, he wrote that Florida can’t stop people from voting just because they’re too poor. Hinkle concluded the felons were unable to pay. One of them owed $50,000 in fines, for example.

“Florida … cannot deny restoration of a felon’s right to vote solely because the felon does not have the financial resources to pay the other financial obligations,” Hinkle wrote.

Hinkle has not ruled on the constitutionality of Senate Bill 7066 itself. It’s set to go to trial in his courtroom in Tallahassee in April.

Patterson argued Tuesday that one of the reasons for the bill was to incentivize felons to repay their debts. But judges noted that many felons simply cannot afford to pay and likely never will.

“You don’t get blood out of a stone,” Anderson said.

The judges also had several questions for attorneys on both sides about how many felons cannot afford to pay back their debts. The state has no definite figures, but a preliminary study by University of Florida professor Dan Smith estimated that 80% of felons had not paid off their court obligations.

In October, Hinkle said lawmakers created an “administrative nightmare” with their bill, and he urged them to fix it this legislative session, which ends weeks before the trial.

Felons have no easy way to see if they still owe financial obligations handed down when they were sentenced. No local or state entity tracks restitution.

GOP lawmakers did include one way for felons to seek relief under Senate Bill 7066: They could ask a judge to convert their financial obligations to community service hours, which are typically converted at $10 per hour in Florida state courts. Such relief is not available to anyone convicted of a federal crime.

But Hinkle scoffed at the idea during a court hearing last year.

“If you had a $25,000 fine in a drug case, nobody’s going to work that off through community service hours,” he told lawyers for the state.

Hinkle said lawmakers could change their bill to make it more generous to felons, and the lawmakers who sponsored SB 7066 said they will make “tweaks” this session.

———

©2020 Tampa Bay Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.)

Visit the Tampa Bay Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.) at www.tampabay.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

State News

Supreme Court Blocks Curbside Voting in Alabama
2020 Elections
Supreme Court Blocks Curbside Voting in Alabama

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision Thursday blocked a lower court ruling allowing curbside voting in Alabama and waiving some absentee ballot requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conservative justices granted Alabama’s request to stay a federal judge’s order that would... Read More

Virus Concerns Grow — As Do Crowds Flocking to Jersey Shore
Health
Virus Concerns Grow — As Do Crowds Flocking to Jersey Shore

BELMAR, N.J. (AP) — As coronavirus-related restrictions are eased and temperatures climb, people are flocking back to the Jersey Shore. And with the July Fourth holiday weekend upon us, that's making some people nervous, particularly given the large crowds that have surfaced at some popular shore... Read More

From Big Cities to Backyards, July 4 Not Usual Blowout Bash
In The News
From Big Cities to Backyards, July 4 Not Usual Blowout Bash

NEW YORK (AP) — The idea sounds almost un-American. The Fourth of July was always a time for communities to come together, daylong celebrations with patriotic parades in the morning and fireworks finales to cap it off. This year, people are being urged to stay home.... Read More

Group of Veteran California Republicans Will Campaign Against Trump and Senators Who Back Him
2020 Elections
Group of Veteran California Republicans Will Campaign Against Trump and Senators Who Back Him

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Now that the Lincoln Project has the nation’s attention with its ads baiting and attacking President Donald Trump, the political action committee is going grassroots. To start, the Lincoln Project, founded by well-known conservatives late last year, is tapping veteran California Republicans to... Read More

After Narrow Primary Win, McGrath Will Need Progressive Vote To Defeat McConnell
2020 Elections
After Narrow Primary Win, McGrath Will Need Progressive Vote To Defeat McConnell
July 2, 2020
by Gaspard Le Dem

WASHINGTON - Amy McGrath successfully fended off a late surge from progressive challenger Charles Booker last month in Kentucky’s Democratic primary for U.S. Senate.  After a week of painstaking ballot counting, McGrath prevailed against Booker by just 15,000 votes out of more than 544,000 votes cast,... Read More

Appeals Court Halts Florida Felons from Registering to Vote, Pending Further Review
State News
Appeals Court Halts Florida Felons from Registering to Vote, Pending Further Review

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A federal appellate court has temporarily stopped a judge’s order that granted hundreds of thousands of felons the right to vote, the latest turn in Florida’s battle over felon voting rights. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled in favor... Read More

News From The Well
scroll top