Florida Prosecutor Testifies in Bid to Get Job Back
Andrew Warren and his attorneys spent much of Tuesday trying to establish that his office never established "blanket policies" about foregoing the prosecution of abortion-related crimes or refusing to prosecute laws that haven't passed.
November 30, 2022 at 08:00 AM
5 minute read
State and Local Government
Andrew Warren, a twice-elected Hillsborough County state attorney suspended by Gov. Ron DeSantis in August, took the stand Tuesday as he testified in a federal lawsuit aimed at getting his job back.
Warren's testimony came on the first day of a trial before U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle that could last until Friday.
Warren, a Democrat first elected in 2016 and re-elected in 2020, alleges in the lawsuit that DeSantis violated his First Amendment rights by removing him from office.
Testifying after opening arguments Tuesday, Warren said he is challenging the suspension because he wants "to be able to do the job that I was elected to" and so that voters would "have their rights protected."
DeSantis' Aug. 4 executive order suspending Warren accused the prosecutor of "incompetence and willful defiance of his duties." The order pointed to a letter Warren signed pledging to avoid enforcing a new law preventing abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
Also, the governor targeted a statement Warren joined condemning the criminalization of transgender people and gender-affirming care.
Warren and his attorneys spent much of Tuesday trying to establish that his office never established "blanket policies" about foregoing the prosecution of abortion-related crimes or refusing to prosecute laws that haven't passed.
Joint statements he signed with dozens of other prosecutors across the country "were not policies of the office," Warren said, but were "value statements" about the issues.
Warren also argued that prosecutors have discretion about how to spend resources.
"Case-specific review is a hallmark of our criminal-justice system," he said. "No statute, no law is exempt from this policy."
Other witnesses Tuesday included Larry Keefe, an adviser to DeSantis who is known as the state's "public safety czar."
According to Keefe, DeSantis in December asked him if any state attorneys in Florida weren't following the law. Keefe, a former U.S. attorney appointed by then-President Donald Trump, said he started an "ad hoc" inquiry into the issue by querying law-enforcement officials around the state.
"By the end of January or February, all roads were consistently leading to Mr. Warren," he said.
Warren "was regarded as a state attorney whose approach to his job was harmful," who was "hostile and antagonistic toward law enforcement" and who was "negatively impacting law enforcement and their ability to protect people," Keefe said.
"The overall theme … was that his approach, the mindset … was creating an environment of lawlessness, chaos … That was what was stunning to me," he added.
After talking with law-enforcement officials, including Hillsborough County Sheriff Chad Chronister, Keefe said he conducted an internet search on Warren.
Jean-Jacques Cabou, who represents Warren, repeatedly pointed to policies establishing that assistant prosecutors were told to use discretion in making charging decisions on a case-by-case basis.
But Keefe wasn't swayed, he said.
"I don't believe that … inoculates Mr. Warren from the consequences of the joint statements," he said.
By signing the joint statements, Warren was effectively "nullifying" the law, Keefe argued.
"That is what is a threat to democracy to me," he said.
"Your interpretation is not what's at issue here," Cabou said, adding that Warren's actions were the focus of the lawsuit.
But Keefe refused to back down.
Allowing prosecutors to refuse to enforce laws would create "chaos and anarchy" in the criminal-justice system, he said.
Cabou also asked Keefe if he ever questioned Warren about his approach to the controversial issues.
Keefe said he never communicated with anyone at the state attorney's office, including by phone or email, until the day Warren was suspended.
Warren earlier Tuesday said he learned of his suspension in an email while he was with a grand jury working on a murder case that his office had solved after nearly three decades.
Keefe — accompanied by two sheriff's deputies in uniforms — handed Warren a "partial copy" of the executive order in which DeSantis suspended Warren, who asked if he could review it. Keefe said no, according to Warren.
"The whole conversation lasted three minutes," Warren said, adding that Keefe instructed the deputies to escort Warren out of the building.
When asked what he would have told Keefe if he were asked about the joint statements, Warren said he would have explained that "the two policies … were not blanket policies" and "were not policies of the office."
Warren's attorneys have argued that the governor overstepped his authority by suspending Warren and that the joint statements are "protected speech."
During opening arguments Tuesday, Cabou told Hinkle that DeSantis suspended Warren "because of what he said and what he believes and because they're different from what the governor believes."
But George Levesque, an attorney who represents DeSantis, argued that the Republican governor suspended Warren "because he was refusing to enforce the law."
Warren's stance against the 15-week abortion restriction was "tantamount to a veto of state law," Levesque argued. "Mr. Warren believes that he can be a law unto himself, choosing which laws are just and which laws he chooses to enforce," Levesque added.
Warren and his supporters have maintained that DeSantis' suspension was crafted to score political points with conservative voters.
Warren's attorneys on Tuesday pointed to a Twitter post by Christina Pushaw, who at the time was a spokeswoman for DeSantis, the night before Warren's suspension was announced.
"Prepare for the liberal media meltdown of the year," Pushaw, who later went to work for DeSantis' re-election campaign, tweeted on Aug. 3.
Levesque said Tuesday that Pushaw "was taken to the proverbial woodshed" for the post.
Warren's suspension and subsequent lawsuit have drawn national attention, with more than 100 legal scholars and dozens of former judges, prosecutors and police chiefs decrying the governor's actions in friend-of-the-court briefs.
"We are fighting for free speech, for the integrity of our elections and for the very values of our democracy," Warren told reporters before the trial began Tuesday.
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 AllCOVID-19 Death Suit Against Nursing Home Sent to State Court, 11th Circuit Affirms
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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