The Republican Party of Florida voted Friday against requiring candidates running in the state's presidential primary to pledge to support the eventual nominee, ensuring former President Donald Trump won't have to sign an oath to compete in the March election alongside Gov. Ron DeSantis.
The decision is seen as a victory for Trump, who has refused to take a similar pledge required for candidates to participate in national GOP debates. The state party had just instituted the pledge requirement in May.
Since then, Trump has maintained dominance over the Republican field while DeSantis, whom he has long targeted as his chief rival, has faltered and had to lay off dozens of staffers. Trump and DeSantis have a particularly fierce rivalry in their shared home state of Florida.
The oath requirement would have forced primary candidates to back the eventual nominee in order to get placed on the ballot. Had Trump been excluded from the primary ballot, he might not have been able to run on the Republican line in the November general election.
Former state GOP chairman and state Sen. Joe Gruters asked that the requirement be removed during a party meeting Friday. Gruters is a longtime Trump supporter and is one of the few Republican Florida lawmakers to back the former president over DeSantis.
"By putting this in place, whether it was intentional or not, the party looks like it was favoring a certain candidate," Gruters said. "This has turned into a proxy battle — the Trump world versus the DeSantis world."
Trump's campaign did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment about the vote, but members of Trump's campaign team shared posts on X, the site formally known as Twitter, written by others that cast the vote as a win for Trump.
Gruters said the requirement also would have violated Republican National Committee rules preventing states from changing the nomination process within two years of an election. But RNC rules give individual state parties until Oct. 1 to decide their plans for how they will nominate delegates who formally choose a presidential nominee.
"When people say, 'Well, Trump doesn't want to sign the loyalty oath,' it's not about that. It's about the party putting up artificial roadblocks that didn't exist four months ago," Gruters said.
Brendan Farrington reports the Associated Press. AP writers Adriana Gomez Licon in Miami and Michelle Price in New York contributed to this report.
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 AllRussian Official Alleges Fraud in Miami Real Estate Dispute Over Trump Palace Condo
2 minute readFreeman Mathis & Gary Taps Orlando for Third New Florida Office This Year
3 minute readCarlton Fields Represents Miss America CEO in $500 Million Suit Alleging Bankruptcy Fraud
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Pusillanimous Press
- 2Contract Lifecycle Management Company ContractPodAi Unveils Leah Drive
- 3'Great News' for Businesses? Judge Halts Transparency Mandate
- 4Consilio Announces ‘Native AI Review,’ Expanding Its Gen AI E-Discovery Offerings
- 5Federal Judge Hits US With $227,000 Sanction for Discovery Misconduct
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