Senate, DeSantis Seek to Scuttle Ex-Broward Sheriff's Lawsuit
Former Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel says his suspension and removal proceedings were little more than a sham and mockery of fairness and due process.
January 28, 2020 at 12:31 PM
4 minute read
Senate President Bill Galvano and Gov. Ron DeSantis are asking a federal judge to reject a lawsuit filed by former Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, who contends his constitutional rights were violated when he was removed from office last year.
Lawyers for Galvano and DeSantis last week filed briefs seeking dismissal of the lawsuit, in part arguing that the Senate is shielded from liability for legislative acts. The Senate held a special session in October and removed Israel from office after DeSantis suspended him because of alleged "neglect of duty and incompetence" related to two mass shootings in Broward County.
A 20-page brief filed Thursday by Senate attorneys said the decision to remove Israel from office "reflected a discretionary, policy decision regarding the qualifications of a constitutional officer to hold office."
"The Florida Constitution grants the Florida Senate the sole authority to remove certain constitutional officers from office," the Galvano brief said. "The Florida Senate pursuant to such constitutional authority and in accordance with its rules and procedures held a complete evidentiary hearing before an appointed special master. The Senate was then called into a special legislative session during which a committee hearing was held and ultimately, upon a vote of a majority of its members, the plaintiff [Israel] was formally removed from office. All of such actions are quintessential legislative acts which are protected under the privilege of legislative immunity."
Attorneys for DeSantis argued in a separate brief that the governor is not responsible for any alleged violation of Israel's rights. That is because the Senate held the special session and removed the former sheriff.
"Although the governor's suspension of Israel commenced the removal proceedings he complains of, that action had no bearing on the manner in which the Senate chose to conduct its own removal proceedings," the DeSantis brief said. "The governor — just like Israel — was a party to the Senate's removal proceedings and subject to both Senate discretion and Senate rules."
But the lawsuit, filed in November in federal district court in Tallahassee, pointed to Senate rules that changed to "satisfy the governor's interests at the due process expense of Sheriff Israel's property and liberty interests."
"In sum and substance, the suspension and removal proceedings were little more than a sham and mockery of fairness and due process, thereby subverting the will of the voters of Broward County who elected Sheriff Israel to a four-year term expiring in November 2020," the lawsuit said. "Despite the constitutional demands for due process and fairness, the governor and the Florida Senate engaged in a highly partisan removal of a democratically elected sheriff under circumstances that denied Sheriff Israel and the citizens of Broward County the fundamental rights to choose public officials and hold public office as conferred by the United States Constitution."
The lawsuit seeks a ruling that Israel's due-process rights were denied and an order restoring him as sheriff.
DeSantis, as a candidate for governor in 2018, pledged to oust the Democratic sheriff for failures associated with the February 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that left 14 students and three staff members dead and another 17 people injured.
In one of his first acts after taking office in January 2019, DeSantis suspended Israel, accusing him of incompetence and neglect of duty for the sheriff's office's handling of the school massacre and a mass shooting at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in 2017 that killed five people.
Israel fought for his job in the Senate, and a special master appointed by Galvano recommended that he be reinstated. The Senate voted 25-15, however, during the special session to remove Israel from office.
The lawsuit contends, in part, that the Senate improperly considered new information during the special session without "affording Sheriff Israel any meaningful opportunity to investigate, contest, or respond to the information."
But the Galvano brief filed last week said Israel "was afforded meaningful process above and beyond what the federal Constitution requires."
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
© 2024 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 AllSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Families Settle Court Battle Over Who Owns Parkland Killer's Name, Likeness
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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