Federal Appeals Court Urged to Hear Elections Law Fight
Voting-rights groups want the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to take up a fight about whether a 2021 Florida elections law made changes that discriminated against Black voters.
May 24, 2023 at 03:00 PM
4 minute read
Voting-rights groups want a full federal appeals court to take up a fight about whether a 2021 Florida elections law made changes that discriminated against Black voters.
Attorneys for the Florida NAACP and Florida Rising Together filed a 41-page petition last week asking the full 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hear a challenge to the law. The request came after a divided panel of the Atlanta-based appeals court last month overturned much of a district judge's ruling against the law.
The petition contended that errors "permeate" the three-judge panel's decision, including that the majority did not properly consider evidence in the case.
"The stakes could not be higher: This case concerns whether the country's third-largest state conducts free and fair elections uninhibited by what the district court found to be racially motivated voting restrictions," the petition said.
Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Republican-controlled Legislature approved the law (SB 90) as GOP leaders across the country pushed to make voting changes after former President Donald Trump's loss in 2020.
While Florida had a relatively smooth 2020 election, Republican lawmakers argued the changes were necessary to make the state's elections more secure. Opponents, however, argued the changes were targeted, at least in part, at Black voters, who overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates.
The law imposed new restrictions on mail-in voting and voter-registration groups and prohibited people from giving snacks and drinks to voters waiting in line to cast ballots.
Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in March 2022 issued a 288-page decision that blocked parts of the law.
"In sum, this court concludes that to the extent promoting voter confidence or preventing fraud may have motivated the Legislature in part, this court finds that the Legislature passed SB 90 with the intent to restructure Florida's election system in ways that favor the Republican Party over the Democratic Party," Walker, who is based in Tallahassee, wrote. "This court further finds that, to advance the Legislature's main goal of favoring Republicans over Democrats, the Legislature enacted some of SB 90's provisions with the intent to target Black voters because of their propensity to favor Democratic candidates."
But last month's 2-1 decision by the appeals-court panel said Walker's decision "does not withstand examination."
"The district court relied on fatally flawed statistical analyses, out-of-context statements by individual legislators, and legal premises that do not follow our precedents," appeals-court Chief Judge William Pryor wrote in a 79-page decision joined by Judge Britt Grant. "On the contrary, examining the record reveals that the finding of intentional discrimination rests on hardly any evidence."
But Judge Jill Pryor, in a dissenting opinion, wrote that Walker, in a "thorough and well-reasoned order, committed no reversible error."
The law, for example, placed additional restrictions on drop boxes used for vote-by-mail ballots. It required boxes to be manned by employees of supervisors of elections and limited their use to early-voting hours. Democrats far outnumbered Republicans in casting vote-by-mail ballots in 2020.
As another example, the law required voter-registration groups to return completed applications to elections supervisors in the counties where applicants live and imposed a 14-day deadline for submitting the forms. Opponents of the law contend minority voters more heavily rely on "third party" voter-registration groups.
The majority of the appeals-court panel found that such parts of the law were not intended to discriminate against Black and Hispanic voters and did not violate the federal Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.
Last week's request for what is known as an "en banc" hearing by the full appeals court came after lawmakers in late April passed a bill that included placing further restrictions on voter-registration organizations. The Legislature on Tuesday formally sent the bill (SB 7050) to DeSantis, who is expected to sign it.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
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
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
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