State Appeals After Judge Blocks Constitution Ballot Measures
Leon County Circuit Judge Karen Gievers issued a seven-page order saying the proposed constitutional amendments improperly “bundled” unrelated issues.
September 10, 2018 at 12:14 PM
4 minute read
Attorney General Pam Bondi's office has quickly appealed a circuit judge's ruling that would block three proposed constitutional amendments from going on the November ballot, including a measure aimed at banning offshore oil drilling and vaping in workplaces.
After hearing arguments Wednesday, Leon County Circuit Judge Karen Gievers issued a seven-page order saying the proposed constitutional amendments improperly “bundled” unrelated issues. Gievers sided with a challenge filed by two plaintiffs, including former Florida Supreme Court Justice Harry Lee Anstead, who contend the proposed amendments would violate voters' First Amendment rights.
But Bondi's office Thursday filed a notice of appeal at the First District Court of Appeal, according to documents posted online Friday. The notice also said the appeal triggers an automatic stay of Gievers' ruling.
Anstead and fellow plaintiff Robert J. Barnas filed the challenge last month against six proposed amendments placed on the Nov. 6 ballot by the Florida Constitution Revision Commission. Gievers, however, focused on three of the measures because the other three are the subjects of separate challenges at the Supreme Court.
The challenge contends, in part, that bundling seemingly unrelated issues in single constitutional amendments violates the rights of voters, who could have conflicting views on the issues. For example, a voter could support a constitutional change to ban offshore oil drilling but oppose a ban on vaping or using electronic cigarettes in workplaces.
Gievers agreed with the arguments on each of the three amendments, including the measure known as Amendment 9 that would ban drilling and workplace vaping.
“The court is unconvinced by the respondent's [state's] argument that offshore oil and gas drilling and vaping are germane as they are both environmentally related,” she wrote. “These measures are independent and unrelated and do not constitute a comprehensive plan of revision and cannot be imposed upon the voters as a unit. Voters cannot reasonably answer the statutorily required yes or no question … without potentially being deprived of their First Amendment constitutional right to cast a meaningful vote on each independent and unrelated proposal.”
During arguments Wednesday before Gievers, however, state Deputy Solicitor General Jordan Pratt said the Constitution Revision Commission has the authority to combine multiple constitutional changes in single ballot measures. The 37-member commission meets every 20 years and has unique power to place proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot.
Pratt also said the plaintiffs offered an “unprecedented” legal theory that the First Amendment does not allow the bundling of proposed amendments.
Pratt said there is “no case in the history of the republic, federal or state, that has ever read the First Amendment to guarantee a right to voters not to vote on bundled proposals.”
Along with the proposal on drilling and vaping, Gievers also struck from the ballot a measure, known as Amendment 7, that deals with governance of the state-college system and death benefits for survivors of first responders and military members. Also, she struck a measure, known as Amendment 11, that would remove constitutional language that prohibits “aliens ineligible for citizenship” from owning property and would revise language to make clear the repeal of criminal statutes does not affect the prosecution of crimes committed before the repeal.
Gievers' ruling came as the Supreme Court considers a series of challenges seeking to block other proposed amendments from going on the ballot. The justices last week, for instance, heard arguments about a controversial education amendment and a measure designed to expand crime victims' rights.
In all, Floridians could vote on 13 amendments in November because of decisions by the Constitution Revision Commission and the Legislature and petition drives. It remained unclear Friday morning when the Supreme Court would rule on the cases it is considering.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
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 AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readAs Unpredictability Rises, Gov't Law Practices Expect Trump Bump. Especially in Florida
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
- 2Artificial Wisdom or Automated Folly? Practical Considerations for Arbitration Practitioners to Address the AI Conundrum
- 3The New Global M&A Kings All Have Something in Common
- 4Big Law Aims to Make DEI Less Divisive in Trump's Second Term
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
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