Ex-felons’ voting rights on hold in Florida

Court agrees to hear DeSantis’ appeal of Amendment 4

Former felons in Florida who owe fines and fees may not get to vote this year after all.

A federal court on Wednesday delayed a May 26 ruling by Judge Robert Hinkle that was one of the biggest expansions of voting rights in Florida history, affecting as many as 775,000 ex-felons.

Now, their ability to vote could be in limbo for months, well past deadlines to register for the August primaries and November presidential election.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta issued the stay after a majority of its judges agreed to Gov. Ron DeSantis’s request for a rare review of Hinkle’s decision by the entire court.

A three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit had already upheld Hinkle’s first ruling in October, which affected just the 17 plaintiffs in the lawsuit by the ACLU, Campaign Legal Center and other voting rights groups. The court also denied a request by DeSantis for the full court to review that decision.

But this time, on Hinkle’s more sweeping decision, judges agreed to hold a hearing before the full court.

Appointments by President Donald Trump have made Republican-appointed judges the majority in the 11th Circuit, which had been majority Democratic-appointed before 2017.

The court set a hearing date of Aug, 11, well past the the July 20 registration deadline for the Aug. 18 pri

mary.

It’s unclear how quickly the court would rule. The registration deadline for the November election is Oct. 5.

“Today’s decision is a setback,” said Paul Smith, vice president of the Campaign Legal Center. “The district court’s decision to block Florida’s pay-to-vote system followed clear Supreme Court precedent. We are hopeful that the court of appeals will follow suit and confirm once and for all that wealth cannot determine a person’s eligibility to vote.”

Almost 65% of Florida voters approved Amendment 4 in 2018, which restored voting rights to the state’s 1.4 million ex-felons. Advocates for the amendment said it was self-implementing, but a law signed by DeSantis in 2019 had requirements to pay back fines, fees and restitution as part of a felon’s sentence.

Hinkle’s ruling stems from a lawsuit by progressive and voting rights groups that claimed the fines and fees requirement in the law were racially discriminatory and the equivalent of a “poll tax” banned by the U.S. Constitution.

Hinkle ruled the provision 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,” and ordered the state to allow those unable to pay to be able to register.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs also argued that there was a perception by Republicans drafting the law that Amendment 4 would largely benefit African Americans, who were more likely to be Democrats.

Elections experts have long said the idea that felon enfranchisement would help Democrats was not true. A study of the 150,000 felons restored their rights by Gov. Charlie Crist between 2007 and 2010 found that most Black felons supported Democrats, but all other felons were slightly more supportive of Republicans, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

The number of ex-felons affected by the ruling was unclear. 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.