Federal judge rules all Florida ex-felons can vote despite fines

A federal judge’s ruling Sunday opens the door for hundreds of thousands of ex-felons to be able to vote in Florida despite owing fines and fees.

Pending an appeal from Gov. DeSantis, the ruling on Amendment 4 by U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle in Tallahassee is potentially one the largest expansions of the voter franchise in Florida history, and it comes just months before the state could play a deciding role in the November election for president.

Hinkle ruled that a law passed by the Legislature and signed by

DeSantis was unconstitutional because “the State of Florida has adopted a system under which nearly a million otherwise-eligible citizens can vote only if they pay an amount of money. … Many do not know, and some may not be able to find out, how much they must pay.”

The judge called the law a “pay-to-vote system.”

“Today’s ruling by U.S District Judge Robert Hinkle finally clears up an argument that should not have taken place,” the Florida League of Women Voters said in a statement. “The voters were clear in 2018 when more than 64% of the electorate voted in favor of Amendment 4, which restored the constitutional right to vote to ex-felons not convicted of murder and felony sexual assault. But after the passage of Amendment 4, the Florida Legislature, via SB 7066, sought to ensure that exfelons, without the means to pay back all financial obligations, would essentially endure a lifetime ban on voting. A spokeswoman for the governor said Sunday night the ruling was being reviewed.

Matthew Isbell, who runs the MCI Maps website devoted to political mapmaking and analysis, said it was unclear what political effect the ruling would have this year if it is upheld.

“Yes, you’ll have an uptick in some registration,” Isbell said. “You will see a maybe a quick surge, like how there was a boost right after the amendment passed before everything kind of got put on hold by the Legislature’s law. But how far does that go? That’s what’s up in the air.”

It’s also uncertain which party would benefit the most, even as Isbell said there was a lot of “wishful thinking” among Democratic activists.

But even a relative handful of votes can make all the difference in Florida. George W. Bush won Florida by 537 votes in 2000 over Al Gore, and the 2018 Senate race between U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson and then-Gov. Rick Scott was decided by 10,033 votes, or 0.13%.

This year, both Republican President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, his presumptive Democratic opponent, are looking to Florida to put them over the top to victory.

The trial stems from a lawsuit by progressive and voting rights groups claiming the fines and fees requirement in SB 7066 was racially discriminatory and the equivalent of a “poll tax” banned by the U.S. Constitution.

That controversial bill was passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed into law by DeSantis in 2019. Felon voting rights advocates had claimed the amendment was self-implementing and did not need any action by the Legislature.

Hinkle had already issued an injunction in October that allowed the 17 plaintiffs to vote but did not extend it to all former felons who had an inability to pay fines and fees until this latest ruling. His ruling on Sunday made it apply to all ex-felons.

The number of ex-felons affected by the ruling is unclear. The byzantine recordkeeping among 67 counties and 20 circuit courts has been a key issue in the lawsuit, with attorneys arguing many ex-felons had no idea how much they owed and couldn’t feel safe swearing on a registration form that they no longer owed money.

Daniel Smith, a researcher at the University of Florida, contended as part of the lawsuit that as many as 775,000 out of the 1.4 million total ex-felons in Florida owed fees and fines. Orlando Resident Desmond Meade, who originally pushed for Amendment 4 along with his Florida Rights Restoration Coalition, has estimated the number was somewhere between 400,000 to 600,000.

Amendment 4 is vague about the issue of fines and fees, stating only that “voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence, including parole or probation.”

Supporters had long said fines and restitution would be considered part of a former felon’s sentence he or she had to complete, including at a panel sponsored by the Orlando Sentinel in October 2018.

Amendment 4 attorney Jon Mills also argued before the state Supreme Court in 2017 that completion of a sentence would include full payment of any fines, saying, “all terms means all terms.”

But while the amendment faced no real opposition in 2018, partisan lines began to be drawn during the bill-writing process in 2019.

Early draft language included much broader restrictions that had to be met before rights were restored, including fines and fees added after sentencing. The ultimate bill included only fines, fees and restitution “specifically ordered by the court as part of the sentence,” and provides former felons with the right to ask a judge to convert fines and fees into community service time.

Democrats and some Amendment 4 supporters compared the law to the now-banned “poll taxes” once imposed on African

Americans in the South. Such taxes were used to prevent blacks from voting during the Jim Crow era before being outlawed by the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1964.

Meade, though, specifically avoided using such comparisons and has focused on registering ex-felons who were eligible and raising money to pay fines and fees for those who weren’t. In a deposition played during the trial, Meade said he had no issues with the law.

Several Democratic counties created a “rocket docket” system designed to quickly move ex-felons through the process of getting fines and fees waived in order for them to be able to vote.

DeSantis can appeal the decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.

A previous appeal failed when Hinkle’s initial injunction was upheld by a three-judge panel, and a request by DeSantis for the full court to hear the case was denied.

It was unclear, however, if the appeals process — which could reach the U.S. Supreme Court — would be fully completed before voting for the general election begins in October with early voting and mail-in ballots.

Maria Matthews, the director of the Division of Elections, said in court, “We don’t have anything final at this point” in terms of a plan for felon voting. “We’ve just been chatting about it.”

Hinkle had angrily told state officials in a March hearing, “If the state is not going to fix it, I will.”