Friday, 23 May 2025
America Age
  • Trending
  • World
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • Business
    • Economy
    • Real Estate
    • Money
    • Crypto & NFTs
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
    • Lifestyle
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Fashion / Beauty
    • Art & Books
    • Culture
  • Health
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
Font ResizerAa
America AgeAmerica Age
Search
  • Trending
  • World
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • Business
    • Economy
    • Real Estate
    • Money
    • Crypto & NFTs
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
    • Lifestyle
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Fashion / Beauty
    • Art & Books
    • Culture
  • Health
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
© 2024 America Age. All Rights Reserved.
America Age > Blog > Politics > Judge Rules Parts of Florida Voting Law Are Unconstitutional
Politics

Judge Rules Parts of Florida Voting Law Are Unconstitutional

Enspirers | Editorial Board
Share
Judge Rules Parts of Florida Voting Law Are Unconstitutional
SHARE

A federal judge in Florida ruled on Thursday that sections of the state’s year-old election law were unconstitutional and racially motivated, and barred the state from making similar changes to its laws in the next decade without the approval of the federal government.

The sharply worded 288-page order, issued by Judge Mark E. Walker of the Federal District Court in Tallahassee, was the first time a federal court had struck down major elements of the wave of voting laws enacted by Republicans since the 2020 election. Finding a pattern of racial bias, Walker in his ruling relied on a little-used legal provision to impose unusual federal restrictions on how a state legislates.

“For the past 20 years, the majority in the Florida Legislature has attacked the voting rights of its Black constituents,” Walker wrote in the decision, which frequently quoted the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Walker argued that the attacks were “part of a cynical effort to suppress turnout among their opponents’ supporters. That, the law does not permit.”

Judge Walker’s decision is certain to be appealed and is likely to be overturned either by the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, which tends to lean conservative, or the Supreme Court, which has sharply limited the federal government’s power to intervene in state election law.

Republicans in Florida immediately denounced the decision. At an appearance in West Palm Beach, Gov. Ron DeSantis called the ruling “performative partisanship” and predicted a reversal on appeal.

“There’s an old saying in law,” said Mr. DeSantis, who has a law degree. “If you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. If you have the law on your side, argue the law. If you have neither, you pound the table. Well, this is the judicial equivalent of pounding the table.”

The ruling targets the portions of the law that limited the use of drop boxes, placed strict rules on voter-registration organizations and forbade some kinds of assistance to Floridians waiting in line to vote. Judge Walker’s order blocks Florida from making changes to those three functions for 10 years without federal sign-off.

Even if fleeting, Judge Walker’s decision represents one of the most aggressive legal broadsides against Republicans in the heated voting rights battles that have followed President Donald J. Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election. The ruling also comes as Democrats and their allies pursue an uphill legal strategy, relying on federal voting protections diminished by the Supreme Court.

In his decision, Judge Walker castigated previous Supreme Court rulings on voting issues and essentially dared the justices to overturn his decision.

“Without explaining itself, the court has allowed its wholly judge-made prudential rule to trump some of our most precious constitutional rights,” the judge wrote.

Judge Walker, who was appointed in 2012 by President Barack Obama, spared few rhetorical flourishes in declaring that Republicans sought to limit Black Floridians’ access to voting. He described Republican lawmakers as offering “conflicting or nonsensical rationales” for the law and argued that they were fundamentally motivated by a partisan drive to win elections.

“Florida has repeatedly sought to make voting tougher for Black voters because of their propensity to favor Democratic candidates,” he wrote.

Judge Walker’s decision pointed to comments made by state lawmakers during floor debate that described voters as “lazy” for failing to make it to the polls.

The Republican lawmakers “trotted out one of the oldest racial tropes known to man in response to concerns about minority disenfranchisement,” Judge Walker wrote.

Wilton Simpson, the Republican president of the Florida Senate, said in a statement that the ruling was “highly unprofessional, inaccurate and unbecoming of an officer of the court.”

The state’s Democrats, locked out of power, celebrated the decision but remained wary that it might not withstand appeals.

“It’s been a tough few years for those of us who think politicians shouldn’t be making it harder for people they don’t like to be able to vote, so today is a big deal,” said Raymond Paultre, executive director of the Florida Alliance, a statewide network of progressive donors. “The fear is that it goes to the 11th Circuit and they fall in line with what Republicans want.”

With his ruling, Judge Walker placed a relatively obscure element of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 at the center of the legal debate over federal protection of voting rights.

For decades, the law required scores of jurisdictions across the country, and especially in the South, to clear voting law changes with the Justice Department. But in 2013, the Supreme Court invalidated the preclearance rules in a case known as Shelby County v. Holder.

Judge Walker’s decision puts Florida under the federal restrictions, using Section 3 of the act. The provision, known as “bail-in,” allows judges to impose additional federal oversight of election law, if states or local governments are found to be repeat offenders in racial discrimination cases, said Travis Crum, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis.

Understand the Battle Over U.S. Voting Rights


Card 1 of 6

Why are voting rights an issue now? In 2020, as a result of the pandemic, millions embraced voting early in person or by mail, especially among Democrats. Spurred on by Donald Trump’s false claims about mail ballots in hopes of overturning the election, the G.O.P. has pursued a host of new voting restrictions.

Why are these legislative efforts important? The Republican push to tighten voting rules has fueled doubts about the integrity of the democratic process in the U.S. Many of the restrictions are likely to affect voters of color disproportionately.

Which states have changed their voting laws? Nineteen states passed 34 laws restricting voting in 2021. Some of the most significant legislation was enacted in battleground states like Texas, Georgia and Florida. Republican lawmakers are planning a new wave of election laws in 2022.

Will these new laws swing elections? Maybe. Maybe not. Some laws will make voting more difficult for certain groups, cause confusion or create longer wait times at polling places. But the new restrictions could backfire on Republicans, especially in rural areas that once preferred to vote by mail.

Courts have used the “bail-in” provision sparingly. Before the Florida ruling, New Mexico and Arkansas were the only states ordered by judges to submit to preclearance requirements, both decades ago. A few counties and cities have as well, Professor Crum said.

Some Democrats have tried to persuade courts to use bail-in requirements on voter identification laws and redistricting maps in North Carolina and Texas, but federal judges have declined to do so in major cases.

The strategy runs the risk of putting voting rights cases before the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority could further weaken the Voting Rights Act.

“From a realistic perspective, it’s unlikely that the 11th Circuit or the Supreme Court would agree with the district court that there was racially discriminatory intent in Florida,” said Nicholas Stephanopoulos, a Harvard Law School professor and an expert on election law. “There’s a lurking fear that the same court that decided Shelby County might decide that bail-in is unconstitutional.”

The ruling on Thursday upheld one of many legal challenges to the voting laws passed by Republican-led legislatures last year. Voting rights groups and Democrats have accused Republicans of using laws that disproportionately target Black voters and other communities of color to achieve a partisan advantage.

Similar arguments were made in Georgia. There, voting rights groups argued that new mail-voting restrictions would give Republicans an edge by targeting Black voters, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic. But experts note that the legal theory used by Judge Walker may not be shared by other justices.

“All things being equal, that if the Florida law is intentional discrimination, the Georgia law should be intentional discrimination,” said Jonathan Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “But there’s no guarantee that our judge in Georgia or the judges in the Texas cases are going to look at it the same way.”

Judge Walker has rebuked Florida elections laws before, often with sharp language against the state’s Republican leaders. In 2018, he ruled that officials in 32 counties with Puerto Rican populations had to provide Spanish-language voting materials — and made reference to how voting rights cases before him had started to resemble the movie “Groundhog Day.”

Mr. DeSantis has repeatedly dismissed some trial courts as politically biased and insisted that his administration’s policies and the Legislature’s laws will be upheld by more conservative appeals courts.

“In the trial courts in Tallahassee, state and federal, we typically lose if there’s a political component to it, but then in the appeals court, we almost always win,” Mr. DeSantis said last fall after a state appeals court allowed a ban on school mask mandates to remain in place, overturning a lower court’s ruling.

TAGGED:Decisions and VerdictsDeSantis, RonFloridaThe Washington MailUnited States Politics and GovernmentVoting Rights Act (1965)Voting Rights, Registration and RequirementsWalker, Mark E (1967- )
Share This Article
Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Previous Article Ethiopia fails to block UN funding for human rights investigation Ethiopia fails to block UN funding for human rights investigation
Next Article House Passes Bill to Limit Cost of Insulin to  a Month House Passes Bill to Limit Cost of Insulin to $35 a Month

Your Trusted Source for Accurate and Timely Updates!

Our commitment to accuracy, impartiality, and delivering breaking news as it happens has earned us the trust of a vast audience. Stay ahead with real-time updates on the latest events, trends.
FacebookLike
TwitterFollow
InstagramFollow
LinkedInFollow
MediumFollow
QuoraFollow
- Advertisement -
Ad image

Popular Posts

EXp picks up 200-agent Hudson Valley brokerage

As a part of eXp, Grand Lux Realty will function out of White Plains, New…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

Chris Simms Gushes About Aaron Rodgers Throughout Thursday’s Recreation

(Picture by Justin Ford/Getty Photos)   The New York Jets got here into the 2024…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

YAYA Coastal Delicacies Nears Debut in North Miami | Way of life Media Group

With its prime bay location in North Miami, YAYA Coastal Delicacies offers gorgeous panoramic views…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

Russian missiles pound Kharkiv as Ukraine talks bring no breakthrough

Ukrainian police rush a traveler to a railway station terminal during an airstrike alarm in…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

You Might Also Like

If You’re A Conservative Girl, You’re In all probability a ‘Handmaiden to the Patriarchy,’ In accordance To Hillary Clinton
Politics

If You’re A Conservative Girl, You’re In all probability a ‘Handmaiden to the Patriarchy,’ In accordance To Hillary Clinton

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
FDA Says No Licenses for COVID-19 Vaccines for Many Individuals With out Trial Information
Politics

FDA Says No Licenses for COVID-19 Vaccines for Many Individuals With out Trial Information

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
What to Know About Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Defence Program That Canada Might Be part of
Politics

What to Know About Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ Defence Program That Canada Might Be part of

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
Lawmakers Examine Federal Spending On Playing, Grownup Leisure And Extra
Politics

Lawmakers Examine Federal Spending On Playing, Grownup Leisure And Extra

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
America Age
Facebook Twitter Youtube

About US


America Age: Your instant connection to breaking stories and live updates. Stay informed with our real-time coverage across politics, tech, entertainment, and more. Your reliable source for 24/7 news.

Company
  • About Us
  • Newsroom Policies & Standards
  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Careers
  • Media & Community Relations
  • WP Creative Group
  • Accessibility Statement
Contact Us
  • Contact Us
  • Contact Customer Care
  • Advertise
  • Licensing & Syndication
  • Request a Correction
  • Contact the Newsroom
  • Send a News Tip
  • Report a Vulnerability
Terms of Use
  • Digital Products Terms of Sale
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Settings
  • Submissions & Discussion Policy
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Ad Choices
© 2024 America Age. All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?