Federal Judge Rejects NAACP Voter Registration Lawsuit
The plaintiffs argued that the state voter-registration form violates a federal law known as the National Voter Registration Act because it does not properly inform potential voters of eligibility requirements.
July 11, 2023 at 01:57 PM
4 minute read
A U.S. district judge rejected a lawsuit alleging that a Florida voter-registration form violates federal law because it does not properly inform convicted felons about eligibility to vote.
Judge Allen Winsor issued a 13-page decision dismissing a lawsuit filed in April by the League of Women Voters of Florida and the NAACP against Secretary of State Cord Byrd.
The case stemmed, in part, from a 2018 constitutional amendment designed to restore the voting rights of felons who had completed their sentences. The plaintiffs argued that the state voter-registration form violates a federal law known as the National Voter Registration Act because it does not properly inform potential voters of eligibility requirements. That has resulted in high-profile arrests of felons who thought they had regained voting rights, according to attorneys representing the plaintiffs.
But Winsor ruled that the form accurately informs felons that they cannot register to vote until their rights are restored and rejected arguments that it should provide more-detailed information.
"The restoration of rights remains the eligibility requirement for felons," Winsor wrote. "And that requirement, as plaintiffs acknowledge, is included on the form they challenge. That is enough to doom plaintiffs' challenge."
Winsor added that "if the NVRA [National Voter Registration Act] required applications to catalog every potential 'precondition to eligibility,' Florida's one-page, front-and-back application form would explode into something hopelessly cumbersome, counter to the NVRA's goal of promoting convenient registration."
After voters passed the 2018 constitutional amendment, the Republican-controlled Legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2019 approved a controversial law to carry out the measure. That law included requiring felons to pay "legal financial obligations," such as restitution, fines and fees, to be eligible to have voting rights restored.
Critics contended that the requirement put up a barrier to restoration of rights and caused confusion about whether many "returning citizens" were eligible to vote. Also, the amendment barred rights restoration for people convicted of murder or felony sexual offenses.
The lawsuit sought to require the state to use a voter-registration application that informs people convicted of murder or felony sexual offenses that they cannot vote unless their rights are restored through the clemency process; informs other felons that they are eligible to vote if they have completed all terms of their sentences, including financial obligations; and informs people convicted of felonies in other states about their eligibility to vote in Florida.
"Florida's eligibility requirements for returning citizens differ depending on the crime, terms of sentence, and state of conviction," the plaintiffs' attorneys wrote in a June 1 court document. "But the application says nothing about these requirements. Making matters worse, Florida agencies have proven unable to timely verify the eligibility of voters. The application exacerbates the widespread confusion about eligibility criteria under Florida's convoluted regime for applicants with prior felony convictions. Florida has chosen to withhold the information that its citizens need to determine their eligibility, and it has exploited this state-created uncertainty by investigating and prosecuting individuals who believed in good faith in their eligibility to vote."
But in a motion to dismiss the case, attorneys for Byrd said the federal law "does not require a detailed explanation of every eligibility requirement on the face of a mail voter registration form."
"For the vast majority of prospective Florida voters, the application provides all the information they need to successfully register," the motion said. "For those who require more detailed information to assess their eligibility, Florida's application provides a link to the Division of Elections website. It is highly unlikely that providing the detailed legal explanations that plaintiffs demand on the face of the application will enhance convenience for any Florida voters, including for persons previously convicted of felonies."
While Winsor granted the state's motion to dismiss the case Monday, he said the plaintiffs could file a revised version.
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 All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond 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
Trending Stories
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