SCOTUS Allows FL Ex-Felon Voter Restrictions Struck Down By Judge To Be Reinstated

[ChiTownDenny]

Source: TPM

Florida’s restrictions on ex-felon voting will likely remain in place at least for August’s primary, after the Supreme Court on Thursday refused to remove a hold on a trial judge’s ruling that those restrictions are unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court’s action in the case, where the voting rights of hundreds of thousands ex-felons could be at stake in the swing state, is the latest example of the conservative majority siding with restrictive laws.

Though the Florida case is not technically linked to the pandemic, in several other recent disputes where voter access in the outbreak was in play, the Supreme Court has consistently sided with keeping in place the more restrictive voter regimes.

Read more: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/supreme-court-florida-ex-felons-voter-restrictaions

---

The case involves a law Florida Republicans passed in 2019, after the state’s voters in 2018 approved a constitutional amendment giving certain ex-felons the right to vote. The 2019 law requires that those ex-felons pay back all remaining court fees before they regain the franchise. The law’s challengers say that the mandate amounts to an unconstitutional poll tax.

[Desert grandma]

1. This is SO FRUSTRATING!

Some Democratic billionaires need to get together and pay these fines to allow these Floridians to vote!

[Jose Garcia]

3. It's not just fines. It's also restitution.

[not_the_one]

10. The repub legislature could just say that was a work around, and did not meet the standard

of requiring the felon to pay the fine, or restitution.

And they would do just that. And appeal.

[Phoenix61]

2. Judges can commute those fines to community

service. The really big issue is finding the fine. They are sold to collection agencies who can then resell them over and over and over. Trying to trace one that is 10 years old becomes impossible. That was the biggest gripe. It’s not just a poll tax it’s a poll tax it’s next to possible to find so how can you possibly pay it.

[atreides1]

4. Roberts made up for his decisions...

...about Trumps taxes!

So much for the court not being political!!!!

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Roberts has a thing for eliminating voting rights

He did it with the Wisconsin absentee ballot extension case during the height of the pandemic in April and he did his coup de grace with the VRA ruling in 2013.

[EleanorR]

5. 64.5% of Florida voters voted to have these rights restored

Lets hope this judicial activism negating their votes pisses them off and brings them out to vote in November.

[LymphocyteLover]

6. this is fucked up-- more voting suppression from the rightwing

they really do hate democracy

[JudyM]

9. This would be a good application of Bloomberg's offer to help Dems win. Pay em all off.

... or just those with Dem voting records

[appalachiablue]

12. +1

[Polybius]

11. Why don't any articles say what the vote was?

This article says three liberals descended, but doesn't even say which three except that one is Sotomayor. That means one liberal sided with the majority. Who? Kagan? Breyer? Certainly not RGB.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-felons-in-florida-seeking-to-regain-the-right-to-vote/2020/07/16/2ede827c-c5dd-11ea-a99f-3bbdffb1af38_story.html

[sl8]

13. From the OP article:

Last edited Fri Jul 17, 2020, 07:09 AM - Edit history (2)

[...]
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan joined Sotomayor’s dissent, but it’s possible that another justice may have dissented privately.
[...]

Also, the article includes a copy of the dissent, which identifies the three justices.


Regarding the actual vote, they don't publicly announce that for orders like this. Keep in mind that this wasn't a case they heard argued. This was the court declining a request to vacate a stay from a lower court. in an unsigned order.

[MissMillie]

14. Then they shouldn't have to pay taxes

No taxation without representation.