Photo by J. Albert Diaz/ ALM

In a court order, the Florida Supreme Court on Wednesday denied Gov. Rick Scott's attempt to boot Justice Barbara Pariente from a case determining the future makeup of the court.

A 10-word sentence was enough for Pariente to respond. The disqualification target normally makes a solo decision on these requests. The order cited no case law in rejecting recusal.

Scott is intent on appointing the next three justices on his final day in office in 2019. Following arguments on the issue Nov. 1, the governor pointed to some Pariente comments caught on a live microphone to support his claim of bias.

At one point, Pariente pointed to a list of the members of the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission and she was heard in a conversation with Chief Justice Jorge Labarga saying “crazy” on an official recording.

The League of Women Voters of Florida is the lead plaintiff in a petition seeking a determination that Scott's successor has the power to appoint successors for Pariente and two other justices who are coincidentally leaving the seven-member court on the day Scott's term ends and his replacement is sworn in.

All three outgoing justices — R. Fred Lewis, Peggy Quince and Pariente — are considered left of center. Three of the remaining justices are considered conservative. Before Scott's first selection, C. Alan Lawson, was named to the court last December, 5-2 decisions became routine with Justices Charles Canady and Ricky Polston in the minority.

John Mills of The Mills Firm in Tallahassee, representing the League of Women Voters, had no comment on the decision Wednesday. But he scoffed at Scott's request in a response filed Tuesday, saying it “is as strident as it is baseless.”

“As titillating as a tale may first appear when it starts with judges being inadvertently caught on a 'hot mic' while chatting between oral arguments, it is now beyond clear that 'there is no there there' in this case,” he wrote. “Giving in to this transparent bullying tactic would set a dangerous precedent, guaranteeing a motion to disqualify her in every case involving the respondent from this point forward.”

Mills' response cited a 1980 Florida Supreme Court decision leaving recusal questions solely to the targeted justice based on “both the legal sufficiency of a request seeking his disqualification and the propriety of withdrawing in any particular circumstances.”

John Tupps, communications director for the governor, said Scott “expects all judges to be fair and impartial. It is disappointing that today's decision was made without providing any plausible justification or explanation for Justice Pariente's comments. Given the gravity of this case, Floridians deserve better.”

Without Pariente, the court would sit with six justices. Mills noted a 3-3 tie would require the appointment of a chief judge from one of the district courts of appeal, which would delay decisions.

The Republican governor and Republican-controlled Legislature are frequently at odds over Supreme Court action.

Pariente has written this year against capital punishment after the court was forced by the U.S. Supreme Court to review a series of death penalty cases. She also has been in the majority in several cases ruling state laws unconstitutional, most recently in a Nov. 9 decision striking down part of a 2013 medical malpractice law.