SCOTUS Allows FL Ex-Felon Voter Restrictions Struck Down By Judge To Be Reinstated
Source: TPM
Floridas restrictions on ex-felon voting will likely remain in place at least for Augusts primary, after the Supreme Court on Thursday refused to remove a hold on a trial judges ruling that those restrictions are unconstitutional.
The Supreme Courts 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 states 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 laws challengers say that the mandate amounts to an unconstitutional poll tax.
Desert grandma
(1,053 posts)Some Democratic billionaires need to get together and pay these fines to allow these Floridians to vote!
Jose Garcia
(2,829 posts)not_the_one
(2,227 posts)of requiring the felon to pay the fine, or restitution.
And they would do just that. And appeal.
Phoenix61
(17,594 posts)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. Its not just a poll tax its a poll tax its next to possible to find so how can you possibly pay it.
atreides1
(16,359 posts)...about Trumps taxes!
So much for the court not being political!!!!
BumRushDaShow
(141,760 posts)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
(2,434 posts)Lets hope this judicial activism negating their votes pisses them off and brings them out to vote in November.
LymphocyteLover
(6,674 posts)they really do hate democracy
Response to LymphocyteLover (Reply #6)
NoRWNJ This message was self-deleted by its author.
JudyM
(29,517 posts)... or just those with Dem voting records
Polybius
(17,728 posts)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
(16,245 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 17, 2020, 06:09 AM - Edit history (2)
[...]
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan joined Sotomayors dissent, but its 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
(38,955 posts)No taxation without representation.