Judge Blocks Contribution Limit in Ballot Drives
"If anything, the amendment (this year's revision) undermines the asserted interest in preventing fraud," U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor wrote.
June 17, 2022 at 09:23 AM
4 minute read
Election and Political Law
A federal judge has rejected an attempt by Florida lawmakers to limit contributions to political committees supporting ballot initiatives, saying it violates the First Amendment.
U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor issued an 18-page ruling Wednesday that included a permanent injunction against the $3,000 contribution limit, which passed in 2021 and was revised this year. The limit was part of long-running efforts by Republican leaders to make it harder to pass ballot initiatives to amend the state Constitution.
Winsor also disputed arguments by attorneys for the Florida Elections Commission, the defendant in the lawsuit, that the contribution limit would help curb fraud in the crucial process of collecting petition signatures to put initiatives on the ballot.
"Here, there is no decent fit between the restriction and the asserted anti-fraud purpose," wrote Winsor, who was appointed to the federal bench by former Republican President Donald Trump. "For one, the FEC (Florida Elections Commission) shows no clear connection between large individual contributions and fraud. In the FEC's view, the fraud illustrates how Florida's ballot initiative process is susceptible to the influence of large donors who fund petition gatherers, who in turn have incentives to falsify petition signatures. But the FEC offers no reason to think that large individual contributions — as opposed to large aggregate contributions — are to blame for this dynamic."
The 2021 law placed a $3,000 limit on contributions from in-state and out-of-state donors to political committees gathering petition signatures. Winsor last year issued a preliminary injunction to block the law, saying it violated First Amendment rights to political expression.
The Legislature this year revised the law to apply the $3,000 limit only to out-of-state donors. The state's attorneys argued that the change made the lawsuit moot.
Winsor acknowledged in Wednesday's ruling that the revision was a "complicating factor." Nevertheless, he ruled the limit unconstitutional.
"If anything, the amendment (this year's revision) undermines the asserted interest in preventing fraud," Winsor wrote. "The FEC has argued that (the law limiting contributions) is important to curb the incentives that 'big money' has in facilitating fraud. But the amendment will allow unlimited contributions to political committees that support ballot initiatives, so long as the money comes from Floridians. This will only undermine any suggestion that there is an adequate 'fit' between the law and the asserted interest."
The judge added, "In short, the parties have not shown that the new law will change anything, so it provides no basis to deny the requested relief. This order will enjoin the FEC from enforcing the contribution limit against plaintiffs as to donations to political committees that sponsor a ballot initiative."
The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and political committees filed the lawsuit, arguing that the contribution limit unconstitutionally restricted speech and was designed to prevent citizens' initiatives from reaching the ballot.
Committees typically have to raise and spend millions of dollars to collect enough petition signatures to take issues to voters. To get on the 2024 ballot, for example, committees would need to submit 891,589 valid signatures.
The law would have applied only to contributions made during the petition-gathering process — not to contributions made after initiatives qualify for the ballot.
Voters during the past two decades have used the initiative process to make a series of high-profile changes, such as legalizing medical marijuana and increasing the minimum wage.
But Republican lawmakers have taken a series of steps to clamp down on the initiative process, arguing that many of the issues should be decided by the Legislature, rather than by amending the Constitution.
GOP lawmakers have frequently railed against large donors funding initiative drives. But supporters of initiatives argue that the Legislature often ignores the will of voters and that ballot initiatives are the only route to pass certain issues.
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 AllFrom Squid Games to City Hall? Broward Lawyer Set Sights on Political Seat
Smartmatic, Newsmax Reach Courthouse Steps Settlement in Defamation Case
2 minute readSmartmatic, Newsmax Seek Favorable Ruling in 2020 Election Defamation Case
4 minute readMedley Candidate Never Slept in the City, But Miami Judge Rules He Can Run in Elections
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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