Uh-Oh: Florida Anti-Mask Law Originally Aimed at the KKK Now 'Theoretically Makes Us All Criminals'
Wearing face masks in the era of COVID-19 has transported Fort Lauderdale attorney Bruce Rogow back to 1980, when he represented a Florida Ku Klux Klan member convicted of illegally concealing his face in public.
April 22, 2020 at 01:33 PM
4 minute read
Fort Lauderdale attorney Bruce Rogow was walking from his house to the mailbox looking a bit like "a robber" in a blue-and-white cloth face mask, when it dawned on him that he had technically just broken the law.
For most Floridians, wearing a face mask in public has become an acceptable new norm amid concerns about contracting COVID-19.
But for Rogow, it's an amusing reminder of a Florida Supreme Court case he had won for a Ku Klux Klan member convicted for covering his face with a white hood. It's also a reminder of a current Florida mask statute that the attorney says "theoretically makes us all criminals" amid the coronavirus pandemic.
|'Halloween or … holding up a bank'
That law, Florida Statute 876.12, governs criminal anarchy, treason and public order crimes.
It says, "No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road, highway, or other public way in this state."
The law used to be broader, blocking anyone from wearing a mask on public property — until Rogow and the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida appealed the conviction of Pensacola Ku Klux Klan member B.W. Robinson in 1980.
Robinson was arrested in 1979 for covering his face at a rally and pleaded no contest so he could appeal. His case went to the Florida Supreme Court, where Rogow challenged the constitutionality of Florida's anti-mask law, arguing it deprived his client of due process and infringed on his First Amendment rights.
"It was one of those cases where, clearly, the statute was overbroad," Rogow said. "Because if it was a cold day in Pensacola, you couldn't have worn a mask. At Halloween, you couldn't have worn a mask. But the statute had a good intention. It was aimed at precluding Klansmen from wearing masks."
Without weighing in on freedom-of-expression and privacy arguments, the Florida Supreme Court reversed Robinson's conviction, finding the law was constitutionally overbroad because it was "susceptible of application to entirely innocent activities."
Rogow recalled the high court was careful not to mention the KKK in its opinion, which drew one dissent from Justice James Elliott Alderman.
"Arthur England, who was one of the justices on the Supreme Court, told me not long afterward, 'Bruce, you really made it hard for us. We had to rule for you,' " Rogow said.
In a weird way, COVID-19 has underscored the stance Rogow took in Robinson v. State.
"Different times make for different views of the same words," Rogow said. "Masks are useful, and when you have a statute that bans them altogether, the authors of the statute don't think about the usefulness of masks, and that just reflects a change in time and a change in situation."
Now that life in Florida has dramatically changed, anti-mask laws could theoretically apply to everyone walking around — though it's highly unlikely they would be, unless the mask-wearer were harassing people or committing a crime.
"In those days, the only times you wore a mask was Halloween or if you were holding up a bank," Rogow said. "How ironic, here we are 40 years later where everybody has to wear a mask."
Read more:
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 AllShaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
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