Appeals Court Sides With Florida on Ex-Felons' Voting Rights
A split Eleventh Circuit panel decision allows Florida to back away from immediate changes.
April 26, 2018 at 12:12 PM
4 minute read
With time running out, a federal appeals court sided with Florida in an escalating battle over the state's process for restoring voting rights to former prisoners.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in Tallahassee gave Florida until Thursday to create a new process after ruling in February that the state's current system is unconstitutional and arbitrary, with decisions possibly swayed by politics and racial factors.
But a split three-judge panel of the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit blocked Walker's ruling from taking effect while it considers an appeal from Gov. Rick Scott and other Florida Republican officials.”We are glad that the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed the lower court's reckless ruling,” said John Tupps, a spokesman for Scott. “Judges should interpret the law, not create it. Gov. Scott will never stop fighting for victims of crime and their families.”
The decision by the appellate court came less than two hours before Scott and GOP officials were scheduled to hold an extraordinary late-night meeting of the state's clemency board Wednesday where they were poised to adopt new rules. The meeting was scrapped after the panel sided with Florida 2-1.
Judge Stanley Marcus wrote the opinion, with Judge William Pryor concurring. Judge Beverly Martin wrote a dissent.
Florida's clash over voting rights comes as Scott campaigns for the U.S. Senate seat of Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson in a state where as many as 1.5 million felons remain disenfranchised by the state's ban in the Florida Constitution.
Walker's ruling kept the ban intact, but he challenged the current system that requires a former prisoner to wait five to seven years before they can even ask to have their voting rights back. The governor and the three elected Cabinet members decide each request individually, subject to the governor's unilateral veto, and the waiting list has grown long.
It wasn't always this way. Shortly after taking office in 2007, then-Republican Gov. Charlie Crist persuaded two of the state's three Cabinet members to approve rules allowing the parole commission to restore voting rights for nonviolent felons without hearings, and ultimately more than 100,000 felons were allowed to vote again.
Scott and state officials changed the process in 2011, and since then fewer than 3,000 have had their rights restored. The governor has defended the change, saying former prisoners should have to demonstrate they can remain out of trouble before their voting rights are returned.
Last year, however, a group of former prisoners whose applications were turned down sued the state.
In its split ruling, the federal appeals court concluded Florida has a good chance of prevailing in its appeal and questioned Walker's decision to order a new process. Marcus wrote there should not be a “rushed decision-making process created on an artificial deadline.”
“There is wisdom in preserving the status quo ante until a panel of this court, on an expedited basis, has had an opportunity on full briefing to come to grips with the many constitutional and equitable issues that have been raised,” Marcus wrote.
Walker first ruled in February the process was unconstitutional and then in late March ordered changes must be put in place by this week.
The clemency board — without holding a public meeting to discuss the ruling — appealed.
While the governor's office has said the decision to appeal was handled properly, Barbara Petersen of the First Amendment Foundation has questioned whether Scott and GOP officials sidestepped the state's open meetings law. She said it “doesn't pass the sniff test to my way of thinking.”
Scott and the Cabinet were sued for open meeting violations in 2015 and ultimately settled the case without admitting wrongdoing.
The legal battle over voting rights for former prisoners is occurring just months before Florida voters will be asked to alter the current ban. Backers of a constitutional amendment won a place on the November ballot. If 60 percent of voters approve, most former prisoners would have their rights automatically restored when they are released.
Gary Fineout reports for the Associated Press.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Black Box Evidence is Bulletproof': South Florida Attorneys Obtain $1 Million Settlement
2 minute readUniversity of Florida Drops Title IX Investigation Against Basketball Head Coach
2 minute readKirkland & Ellis Taps Former Co-Chair of Greenberg Traurig’s Digital Infrastructure Practice
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Bridgeport Jury Returns $5.7M Verdict: The Winning Strategy
- 2Robinson & Cole Adds to Immigration Team in Philly
- 3DC Circuit Revives Firefighters' Religious Freedom Litigation in Facial Hair Policy Row
- 4‘High Demand’: Former Trump Admin Lawyers Leverage Connections for Big Law Work, Jobs
- 5Considerations for Establishing or Denying a Texas Partnership to Invest in Real Estate
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250