State Urges Court to Uphold Elections Law
"The record shows the Florida Legislature attempting to balance integrity with access to improve voter confidence, provide clear rules, and address issues before they affected Florida's election," the brief filed at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said.
July 15, 2022 at 11:12 AM
4 minute read
Disputing that the Legislature acted in "bad faith," attorneys for the state, elections supervisors and national Republican groups urged a federal appeals court this week to overturn a ruling that said a 2021 elections law was unconstitutionally intended to discriminate against Black Floridians.
In two briefs, the attorneys took aim at a March 31 ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, who backed voting-rights groups in a challenge to parts of the law and wrote that Florida "has repeatedly, recently, and persistently acted to deny Black Floridians access to the franchise."
Lawyers for Secretary of State Cord Byrd, Attorney General Ashley Moody and county elections supervisors said in a 67-page brief Monday that Walker "got it wrong" and that the measure (SB 90) is a "facially neutral and common-sense election law."
"The record shows the Florida Legislature attempting to balance integrity with access to improve voter confidence, provide clear rules, and address issues before they affected Florida's election," the brief filed at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said.
A panel of the Atlanta-based appeals court is scheduled to hear arguments Sept. 15 in the case. After Walker found parts of the law unconstitutional, the appeals court in May issued a stay of his ruling — effectively allowing the law to be in effect during this year's elections.
The law, which drew fierce debate during the 2021 legislative session, placed restrictions on the use of "drop boxes" for submitting vote-by-mail ballots, imposed additional regulations on voter-registration organizations and prevented groups from providing items such as food and water to voters waiting in line at polling places.
Republican lawmakers and Gov. Ron DeSantis approved the law amid a broader push by the GOP nationally to change election laws after former President Donald Trump's loss in 2020 to Democrat Joe Biden. Florida had relatively few problems in the 2020 elections, but lawmakers and DeSantis argued they needed to add safeguards to help prevent fraud.
In challenging the law, however, voting-rights groups argued it was intended to restrict minority voters' access to the ballot. As an example, the number of Black voters using drop boxes significantly increased in 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Black voters are a key Democratic Party constituency.
Walker, in a 288-page ruling, agreed with the voting-rights groups about the discriminatory intent of the law and found parts of it unconstitutional. In addition, he took the rare step of putting Florida under a process known as "preclearance," meaning that a court would have to approve changes to parts of elections laws.
But in issuing a stay of the ruling May 6, a panel of the appeals court took issue with some of Walker's conclusions, including saying he failed to "properly account for what might be called the presumption of legislative good faith."
The brief filed Monday by attorneys for the state and supervisors of elections also focused, in part, on the good-faith issue.
"The district court instead presumed bad faith," the brief said. "It assumed that SB 90's proponents intended to impose disparate impacts on black Floridians, instead of crediting their denials that any such impacts would occur. And although the law doesn't require legislators to justify election laws with specific evidence, the court used the supposed lack of record evidence to discredit the legislators' concerns with voter confidence and fraud as pretextual shams."
The brief also said "facially neutral" laws about issues such as drop boxes and activities near polling places fall within the state's constitutional authority to manage elections. It said Walker's ruling instead focused on "the distant past and disparities" and was based on limited evidence about the 2021 law.
"It conflated partisanship with race," the brief said. "It disregarded the legislative presumption of good faith and the principles of equal sovereignty."
The Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee intervened in the case and filed a 62-page brief Monday backing the law. The plaintiffs have not filed their initial appellate briefs.
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 AllWhat Will Happen to the Nominees in Florida's Southern and Middle Districts?
3 minute readBig Law Lawyers Fan Out for Election Day Volunteering in Call Centers and Litigation
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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