Court Digest

Florida
Judges: Felons can’t vote until they pay fines, fees
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — Florida felons must pay all fines, restitution and legal fees before they can regain their right to vote, a federal appellate court ruled Friday in a case that could have broad implications for the November elections.

Reversing a lower court judge’s decision that gave Florida felons the right to vote regardless of outstanding legal obligations, the order from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was a disappointment to voting rights activists and upheld the position of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and the GOP-led state Legislature.

Under Amendment 4, which Florida voter passed overwhelmingly in 2018, felons who have completed their sentences would have voting rights restored. But the legal dispute arose after lawmakers the next year moved to define what it means to complete a sentence.

In addition to prison time served, lawmakers stipulated that all legal financial obligations, including unpaid fines and restitution, would also have to be settled before a felon could be eligible to vote.

The full 11th Circuit agreed in a 200-page ruling on a 6-4 vote, deciding that the Constitution’s due process clause was not violated by the passage of the law implementing Amendment 4.

“States are constitutionally entitled to set legitimate voter qualifications through laws of general application and to require voters to comply with those laws through their own efforts,” Chief Judge William Pryor wrote in the majority opinion. “So long as a state provides adequate procedures to challenge individual determinations of ineligibility — as Florida does — due process requires nothing more.”

Four judges issued a dissenting opinion. They argued in part that it is sometimes extremely difficult for returning felons to know what outstanding financial obligations they may still have and that the state should create a mechanism to provide that information.

“In light of the chaos created by the majority’s holding that (financial obligations) must be satisfied according to the ‘every-dollar’ method, countless scores of individuals will be uncertain of their eligibility to vote,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Beverly Martin in the dissent.

“With its constitution amended in this way, Florida gained an obligation to establish procedures sufficient to determine the eligibility of returning citizens to vote, and to notify them of their eligibility in a prompt and reliable manner,” the dissenters added.

The amendment permanently bars convicted murderers and rapists from voting, regardless of financial debts. Still, an estimated 774,000 disenfranchised felons in Florida who could register to vote represents a significant bloc of voters, should they be allowed to cast ballots.

The ruling could influence the election outcome in November. Florida is considered a must-win state in President Donald’s Trump’s bid for reelection and is famed for its razor-thin statewide election results. Democrats had hopes of gaining support from thousands of former felons in Florida.

“This is a deeply disappointing decision,” said Paul Smith, vice president at the Campaign Legal Center which is pushing for full voting rights for most felons. “While the full rights restoration envisioned by Amendment 4 has become less likely to be realized this fall, we will continue this fight for all Florida voters, so the full benefits of Amendment 4 will someday be realized.”

Wisconsin
State Supreme Court action on ballots raises many questions
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision  to halt the mailing of absentee ballots raised concerns that it could cause delays and confusion in the presidential battleground state.

The decision Thursday, 54 days before the Nov. 3 election, was only temporary. However, it’s unclear when the court will make a final ruling that will restart the process of sending ballots to voters.
Here’s a look at what’s known so far:

Q: WHAT DID THE COURT DO?

A: The state Supreme Court ordered an immediate halt to the mailing of absentee ballots to the nearly 1 million voters who had a request on file.

The court also asked for details from the Wisconsin Elections Commission about how many ballots had been requested and mailed already. As of 5 p.m. Thursday, clerks indicated that 380,000 ballots had been sent but that information was incomplete. And clerks indicating in the state’s system that ballots had been sent doesn’t necessarily mean they’re in the mail already.

Any ballots that already went out and that voters complete and send back to the state will be counted. If the court orders a change to the official ballot, voters who already received initial ballots will receive the new one. If the new one is also returned, only it will be counted.

Q: WHO FILED THE LAWSUIT?

A: Green Party presidential candidate Howie Hawkins and his running mate, Angela Walker, contested the state elections commission decision not to put their names on the presidential ballot.

The elections commission twice deadlocked 3-3 last month on whether Hawkins had submitted enough valid signatures to get on the ballot. All three Republicans said that he had, while the three Democrats disagreed.

A complaint alleged that Walker listed an incorrect address on thousands of her nominating signatures. That resulted in them not having enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Q: WHAT ABOUT KANYE WEST?

A: The rapper is also  trying to get on the ballot in Wisconsin and has filed a separate lawsuit. That case is pending before a judge in Brown County Circuit Court, who said he would issue a decision by Monday.

No matter what the judge decides in that case, it’s almost certain to be appealed quickly to the state Supreme Court. The court will then decide whether either, or both, West and Hawkins should be added to the ballot.

West was kept off by the elections commission on a bipartisan 5-1 vote. They determined that West’s campaign team did not submit its nominating papers until moments after the 5 p.m. deadline.

Q: HOW BIG OF A DEAL IS THIS?

A: Everything that affects voting in  swing state Wisconsin, especially less than two months before the Nov. 3 election, is a big deal. President Donald Trump won the state by less than a percentage point in 2016 and polls suggest this year’s race between Trump and Democrat Joe Biden will also be tight.

Democrats fear that adding the Green Party candidate to the ballot could siphon liberal votes away from Biden. In 2016, the Green Party candidate got 31,006 votes in the state, which was roughly 8,000 more votes that Trump’s margin of victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton. Republicans are pushing West’s candidacy, raising concerns from Democrats  that they think he could sway voters away from Biden.

Changing the ballot now would be expensive and burdensome for the 1,850 local election clerks tasked with printing and disseminating the ballots. And any delay in sending absentee ballots would shorten the window for voters to return them. There are already widespread concerns about the U.S. Postal Service’s ability to handle the increase in volume. Both parties have been urging voters to request absentee ballots now and return them as quickly as possible.

Q: WHAT ABOUT MISSED DEADLINES?

A: Wisconsin state law requires absentee ballots be mailed by Sept. 17 to everyone with a request on file. That’s nearly 1 million voters. Federal law requires Wisconsin and all other states to mail absentee ballots to military and overseas voters by Sept. 19. Those deadlines were set to give voters plenty of time to return the ballots.

Given those looming deadlines, there is hope that the state Supreme Court will act within days to determine who should and should not be on the ballot.

Q: WHAT ARE OTHER KEY DATES?

A: Oct. 29 is the deadline for most voters to request a ballot by mail. Returned ballots must be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day, when polls close. There is a pending federal lawsuit filed by Democrats and their allies that seeks to extend the deadlines for people to request and return absentee ballots.

Voters can also choose to cast absentee ballots at their local election clerk’s office or vote in-person on Election Day. The state elections commission has estimated that about 2 million of the state’s roughly 3 million eligible voters will choose to vote absentee by mail.

Kentucky
State Supreme Court candidate receives reprimand
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — A circuit judge running for a seat on Kentucky’s Supreme Court in this year’s election has been reprimanded for misconduct.

Circuit Judge Robert B. Conley was sanctioned this week by the Judicial Conduct Commission in part for throwing a man in jail for three days for contempt of court without conducting a hearing, the Courier Journal  reported. Conley is a judge for Greenup and Lewis counties.

The commission said Conley violated three rules, including one requiring judges to be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants. Conley agreed to the sanction.

Conley is running for a Supreme Court seat from eastern Kentucky. Conley said in an email that he has served on the bench for 26 years and this was his first sanction. He said he has acknowledged that he did not act appropriately on the day in question and has apologized.

Conley’s opponent in the Supreme Court race, Democrat state Rep. Chris Harris, said: “A judge, particularly one running for a seat on Kentucky’s highest court, should treat everyone in his or her courtroom fairly and impartially, with dignity and respect, regardless of their social or economic standing. Clearly, Bob Conley didn’t live up to that standard in the instances described in the reprimand.”

Virginia
School board continues to defend transgender bathroom policy
GLOUCESTER, Va. (AP) — A school board in Virginia will continue to defend its transgender bathroom ban in federal court.

The Daily Press reported Thursday that the Gloucester School Board has asked a full federal appeals court to review the long-running lawsuit filed by former student Gavin Grimm.

The request comes after two federal courts have sided with Grimm and called the school board’s policy discriminatory and unconstitutional. The policy required Grimm to use restrooms that corresponded with his biological sex - female - or use private bathrooms.

A federal court in Norfolk ruled against the school board last year. And a three-judge panel with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond ruled against the school board last month.

The board is now requesting a full hearing at the appeals court. Such hearings are granted less than 1 percent of the time. That could mean that the next stop for the case is the U.S. Supreme Court.

The school board said in its filing that its policy “treats all students equally, and is substantially related to the important objective of protecting student privacy.”