Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Felons may vote in Florida’s presidential primary while ‘poll tax’ challenge continues

Florida voters in 2016

Voters lining up in Tallahassee to cast ballots in the last presidential election.

Mark Wallheiser/Getty Images

Hundreds of thousands of felons will be able to participate in Florida's local elections next month, and the presidential primaries next year, for the first time since their incarceration.

That is the most immediate and consequential result of a federal judge's decision to temporarily block implementation of a state law that imposes financial requirements before criminals released from prison and done with parole may reclaim the franchise.

Friday's ruling was a major victory for both civil rights advocates and for the two-thirds of Floridians who endorsed last November's ballot measure restoring voting rights to an estimated 1.4 million felons who have completed their sentences — the largest single expansion of voting rights in the United States in half a century and the biggest ever mandated by a popular vote.

It was a significant defeat for the Republicans in control of state government, who enacted a law in June restricting the vote to felons who had paid all fines, fees and restitution — a move that would prevent far more than half those released from the state's prisons from ever registering.


Gov. Ron DeSantis said he would not appeal the decision but would instead ask the Legislature to revise the law when it convenes next year. This assures felons may vote in local contests in three weeks and makes it highly likely they'll all be able to vote in the state's potentially crucial presidential primary March 17 — the fourth-biggest delegate prize in next year's Democratic nominating contests.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle issued something of a split decision last week. He ruled that while it's acceptable for the state to ask that all financial penalties be paid, it's not acceptable to bar people from voting if they cannot afford to pay.

Florida "cannot deny restoration of a felon's right to vote solely because the felon does not have the financial resources to pay the other financial obligations," Hinkle declared, citing as precedent a federal appeals court ruling from 14 years ago.

He blocked implementation of the current law until at least April, when he'll conduct a trial on the question of whether the fine and fee payment requirements amount to an unconstitutional poll tax.

"When an eligible citizen misses an opportunity to vote, the opportunity is gone forever; the vote cannot later be cast," Hinkle wrote in explaining the rational for his injunction. "So when the state wrongly prevents an eligible citizen from voting, the harm is irreparable."

The judge said the Legislature must come up with a measure permitting poor felons to vote, which he suggested could be as simple as amending Florida's voter registration application to allow felons to declare themselves indigent.

A spokeswoman for DeSantis, Helen Aguirre Ferré, said the governor agrees with the judge's decision. Hinkle's ruling, she said, "affirms the governor's consistent position that convicted felons should be held responsible for paying applicable restitution, fees and fines while also recognizing the need to provide an avenue for individuals unable to pay back their debts as a result of true financial hardship."

Some Republicans in Tallahassee are working behind the scenes on legislation that could respond to a more sweeping ruling from Hinkle next year that the repayment law amounts to a poll tax, or to the results of a separate lawsuit challenging the June statute that's headed to the Florida Supreme Court.

For now, county elections officials have no means for determining if a felon can afford to pay court assessments.

The repayment law was widely seen as an attempt by the GOP to suppress turnout from a new bloc of voters in the biggest state with a nearly even partisan split. Many if not most of the former felons are Latinos or African-Americans, whose votes generally go lopsidedly to the Democrats.

The nonprofit Florida Rights Restoration Coalition has raised nearly $1 million to help felons pay outstanding fines and will conduct a statewide bus tour next month to help them understand how to register.

The restoration of the vote was ordered by 65 percent of the electorate in November and applies to all felons, except those convicted of murder or sex offenses, who have completed their sentences. The GOP said the subsequent law is true to the voters' wishes because court-imposed financial obligations are part of a sentence.

But critics say the move is undeniably similar to the sort of poll taxes used to disenfranchise black voters during the era of Jim Crow, which led to ratification in 1964 of the 24th Amendment assuring that the right to vote cannot be denied for failure to pay "any poll tax or other tax."

The decision is "a critical step towards ensuring that the voting rights of other people with felony convictions are not trampled on by Florida officials," Leah Aden, the deputy director of litigation for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said in a statement. "We will continue to fight for full relief for Florida voters who must not pay to vote."


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less