Jones v. DeSantis
United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division
May 24, 2020, Decided; May 24, 2020, Filed
CONSOLIDATED CASE NO. 4:19cv300-RH/MJF
OPINION ON THE MERITS
The State of Florida has adopted a system under which nearly a million otherwise-eligible citizens will be allowed to vote only if they [*6] pay an amount of money. Most of the citizens lack the financial resources to make the required payment. Many do not know, and some will not be able to find out, how much they must pay. For most, the required payment will consist only of charges the State imposed to fund government operations—taxes in substance though not in name.
The State is on pace to complete its initial screening of the citizens by 2026, or perhaps later, and only then will have an initial opinion about which citizens must pay, and how much they must pay, to be allowed to vote. In the meantime, year after year, federal and state elections will pass. The uncertainty will cause some citizens who are eligible to vote, even on the State's own view of the law, not to vote, lest they risk criminal prosecution.
This pay-to-vote system would be universally decried as unconstitutional but for one thing: each citizen at issue was convicted, at some point in the past, of a felony offense. A state may disenfranchise felons and impose conditions on their reenfranchisement. But the conditions must pass constitutional scrutiny. Whatever might be said of a rationally constructed system, this one falls short in substantial respects. [*7]
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has already ruled, in affirming a preliminary injunction in this very case, that the State cannot condition voting on payment of an amount a person is genuinely unable to pay. See Jones v. Governor of Fla., 950 F.3d 795 (11th Cir. 2020). Now, after a full trial on the merits, the plaintiffs' evidence has grown stronger. This order holds that the State can condition voting on payment of fines and restitution that a person is able to pay but cannot condition voting on payment of amounts a person is unable to pay or on payment of taxes, even those labeled fees or costs. This order puts in place administrative procedures that comport with the Constitution and are less burdensome, on both the State and the citizens, than those the State is currently using to administer the unconstitutional pay-to-vote system.
I. The Consolidated CasesRead The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90729 *
KELVIN LEON JONES et al., Plaintiffs, v. RON DeSANTIS et al., Defendants.
Prior History: Jones v. DeSantis, 410 F. Supp. 3d 1284, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180624 (N.D. Fla., Oct. 18, 2019)
felons, unable to pay, pay-to-vote, eligible, Elections, sentence, voters, voting, restitution, fines, financial obligation, registrations, registering, advisory opinion, felony, cases, costs, felony conviction, rational-basis, genuinely, restore, plaintiffs', includes, amounts, notice, unpaid, every-dollar, ineligible, terms, supervision