U.S. court rules Florida cannot force felons to pay fees before voting
Send a link to a friend
[May 26, 2020]
By Pete Schroeder
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge ruled
on Sunday that the state of Florida cannot force felons to pay legal
fines and other fees before allowing them to register to vote.
The ruling, for now, clears the way for potentially hundreds of
thousands of citizens to register to vote in the swing state for the
November presidential election.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle found that a new state
law amounts to an "unconstitutional pay-to-vote system" imposed on
citizens who may not be able to pay fines, or even know if anything is
owed.
"The 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," said Hinkle's ruling in the
Northern District of Florida.
A group of Floridians and voting rights organizations sued Republican
Governor Ron DeSantis last June, arguing that the law amounts to an
illegal poll tax.
DeSantis will have the opportunity to appeal the ruling. His office did
not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Republican-led Florida Senate drew up the payments bill just months
after Floridians approved a constitutional amendment restoring voting
rights to felons who have completed their sentences. DeSantis signed the
bill into law in June 2019.
[to top of second column]
|
![](../images/052620pics/news_v43.jpg)
A voting booth is seen at a polling center inside a fire station in
the Coral Gables neighbourhood during the Democratic presidential
primary election in Miami, Florida, U.S. March 17, 2020.
REUTERS/Marco Bello
![](../images/ads/current/fitzpatrick_lda_SPONSOR_2017.png)
At least 775,000 felons have unpaid legal costs, and African
Americans are more likely to owe more, according to Daniel Smith, a
University of Florida political scientist who testified in a report
submitted to the court.
Conservatives argued the law was necessary to clarify what is
required under the amendment, while critics of the measure said it
effectively disenfranchised those potential voters again.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2020/May/08/images/ads/current/graue_sda_2016.png)
(Reporting by Pete Schroeder and Simon Lewis; editing by Grant
McCool)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |