Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Florida's fight over felon voting keeps intensifying

Forida Gov. Ron DeSantis

Voting rights advocates and Gov. Ron DeSantis are continuing their court battle over Florida's plans for restoring felons' voting rights.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The courtroom tussle over when felons may vote in Florida has taken two fresh turns.

Advocates for voting rights and civil rights last week asked a federal judge to block enforcement of a new law setting conditions on when former convicts can return to the polls — at least until their lawsuit is settled.

In response, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis asked the same judge to dismiss the advocates' litigation, arguing their complaints should be weighed in state (not federal) court.

There are several reasons why the dispute over restoring the franchise to Floridians after they're released from prison has become one of the most closely watched voting rights cases of the decade, even becoming an issue in the presidential campaign.


Because Florida is the nation's most populous tossup state, any significant shift in the voter rolls (in this case, benefitting Democrats) could have decisive consequences. When the initial decision to restore felons' voting rights was made by 64 percent of voters in a referendum last fall, the result was hailed as signaling a cultural shift and also the power of ballot initiatives. And because the Republicans in Tallahassee have since moved to limit the sweep of the decision, the current state of affairs is especially polarized between the people and their government.

The Legislature passed a law this spring to implement the referendum, which restored voting to felons (except murderers or sexual felons) "who have completed all terms of their sentence, including parole or probation." But the law says completing the sentence will include paying all fines, fees and restitutions ordered by the court.

The lawsuit says those conditions amount to the sort of poll tax that's out of bounds under the U.S. Constitution. But the governor says the dispute should be refereed using Florida's constitution.

Fewer than one in five of the state's 1.4 million released felons have repaid all of their outstanding financial obligations, the plaintiffs say.

Some Floridians affected by the amendment have already registered to vote and cast ballots in municipal elections since the law took effect in January, the lawyers argued in a brief with U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle, so adding the state law requirements now would sow confusion.


Read More

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less