Read the unanimous opinion here.
UPDATE -- while DeSantis lost this battle, he won a big one in the en banc 11th Circuit. William Pryor writes the majority opinion backing DeSantis' position that felons cannot vote until they have paid all court costs, fees, etc. Judges Jordan, Martin, and Jill Pryor all write dissents. Judge Jordan's ends this way:
Our predecessor, the former Fifth Circuit, has been rightly praised for its landmark decisions on voting rights in the 1950s and 1960s. See generally Jack Bass, Unlikely Heroes: The Dramatic Story of the Southern Judges Who Translated the Supreme Court’s Brown Decision Into a Revolution for Equality 259–77 (1981). I doubt that today’s decision—which blesses Florida’s neutering of Amendment 4—will be viewed as kindly by history.
Pryor responds like this:
I write separately to explain a difficult truth about the nature of the judicial role. Our dissenting colleagues predict that our decision will not be “viewed as kindly by history” as the voting-rights decisions of our heroic predecessors. Jordan Dissent at 189 (citing Jack Bass, Unlikely Heroes: The Dramatic Story of the Southern Judges Who Translated the Supreme Court’s Brown Decision Into a Revolution for Equality (1981)). But the “heroism” that the Constitution demands of judges—modeled so well by our predecessors—is that of “devotion to the rule of law and basic morality.” Patrick E. Higginbotham, Conceptual Rigor: A Cabin for the Rhetoric of Heroism, 59 Tex. L. Rev. 1329, 1332 (1981) (reviewing Bass, Unlikely Heroes, supra). As a distinguished colleague presciently warned decades ago, there is a “genuine risk” that later judges will “easily misunderstand” this lesson. Id. Our duty is not to reach the outcomes we think will please whomever comes to sit on the court of human history. The Constitution instead tasks us with “administering the rule of law in courts of limited jurisdiction,” id. at 1343, which means that we must respect the political decisions made by the people of Florida and their officials within the bounds of our Supreme Law, regardless of whether we agree with those decisions. And in the end, as our judicial oath acknowledges, we will answer for our work to the Judge who sits outside of human history.
DeSantis should take the sanction. Outrageous.
ReplyDeleteSo DeSantis should tear up Florida's Constitution? Outrageous.
ReplyDeleteQuite interesting.
ReplyDeleteThis is a blatant violation of separation of powers. Court is dictating who serves on the court. Outrageous.
ReplyDeleteThe system is rigged; that is the "difficult" truth.
ReplyDeleteDave, if Luck and Lagoa would've recused and there was a tie, the district court order would've stood?
ReplyDeleteI am shocked! Please, once Lagoa and Luck denied request that they recuse themselves (if it takes you 30 pages+ to explain why you should not recuse yourself - you should recuse yourself), we knew what the outcome of the case would be. Most conservative federal court affirms Jim Crow era law prohibiting ex-felons (mostly African-Americans) from voting. History will not be kind.
ReplyDeleteVoter suppression plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteJudge Pryor's conclusion could just as easily be a defense of Dred Scott or Plessy v. Ferguson. And maybe it is.
ReplyDeleteMr. Randall,
ReplyDeleteThe cases you cite are about race. The felon voting case is about felons, whatever race they happen to be.
I perused the dissent. It seem to say it is super duper hard to figure out what fines you owe, and they are impossible to pay.
Query: if you commit a felony, and want to vote again, wouldnt the best solution be to pay attention in court about exactly what fine is imposed, to keep all the paperwork, to meticulously record your payments, and to work as hard as you can to pay your debt to society?
We are to suppose felons are stupid and cannot do that? And dont competent defense attorneys like you make sure to advise the felons about paying attention etc?
Life is full of administrative difficulties. Try running a business with taxes, licensing, covid rules. Now we ask felons to pay their debt and we treat them like babies?
Where was Judge Rosenbaum? Was this en banc?
ReplyDeleteLet’s not forget that the respondents promised the Florida Supreme Court that restitution would not be part of the deal. I could care less about costs and fines but restitution must be paid in full to make a victim whole.
ReplyDeleteIf George Soros truly gave a shit about felons voting he should spend his money paying off felons' fines, restitution, and court costs rather than trying to make America socialist.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to politics the criminal class are all right-wing a$$holes. They are Trumpanistas, so, while justice is offended by the Republican Legislature's grinding it's bootheel in the face of Florida's voters, it is probably good for progressives that these folks can't vote.
ReplyDelete9:32:
ReplyDeleteHistory lesson: felon disenfranchisement laws were a key part of Jim Crow era laws passed with the sole aim of keeping people of color from voting. That was their purpose. Most states that had those laws have gotten rid of those laws in whole or in part because they have come to terms with the racist genesis of those laws. That is what the people of the state of florida clearly said as well. The republican majority state legislature did not like that and passed the law in question. The most conservative and southern federal court in the country was more than happy to keep that Jim Crow era law alive.
1255
DeleteWhen florida began to disenfranchise felons, what percentage of those wno lost the vote at that time were white and what percentage were black?
Is the answer 100% white and 0% black?
I remember something about the law in its majesty equally allowing the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge. And now to pay their fines so they can vote too.
ReplyDelete