Skip to main content

Exit WCAG Theme

Switch to Non-ADA Website

Accessibility Options

Select Text Sizes

Select Text Color

Website Accessibility Information Close Options
Close Menu

Judge Temporarily Blocks Florida Law Eliminating Ex-Felon’s Right to Vote Due to Outstanding Fees

shutterstock_534162046 (1)

In late October, a Florida judge temporarily blocked the new law that prevents ex-convicts from voting in the state until they have paid all fines fees and restitution; a law that has been called a “poll tax” by a number of civil rights advocates. According to the judge, the law could very well be found to be unconstitutional; and Florida cannot legally deny the restoration of an ex-felon’s right to vote simply because they do not have the financial resources to pay various obligations; thus warranting a preliminary injunction being put in place until the merits of the case can be addressed in April. The decision is expected to affect approximately 1.5 million former felons.

In addition to blocking the new law, the judge dictated the Florida must establish a way for ex-felons who are eligible – pursuant to Amendment 4 passed by voters last fall – to register to vote if they are genuinely unable to pay their fees and restitution.

The Civil Rights Arguments & Decision in Case

Civil rights specifically argued that the law violated the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits denying the right to vote in an election for failure to pay any tax. The judge specified that the states have the right to deny voting privileges to those who can afford to pay fines and other court costs (but who chose not to), however, Florida cannot restore a former felon’s right to vote simply because the felon cannot pay legal debts. In fact, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals already decided that this was the case in 2005 involving a Florida felon who was unable to pay restitution.

Still, the state has the right to investigate whether the former felon’s claim that they cannot pay the fees is legitimate, as well as establish a specific process for how voting rights will be restored. Therefore, the judge indicated that those plaintiffs who brought the case can seek to regain their rights by proving that they are unable to pay off these debts.

Next Steps

The state now has the option of challenging the injunction at the Florida Supreme Court level or simply waiting until the merits of the case are decided at the federal level in April. The judge’s decision may have left yet another option open to the state, however, as he enumerated a number of rights retained by the state to limit voting rights, and specified that the issue here was the fact that “the state’s only reason for denying the vote is failure to pay an amount that the plaintiff is genuinely unable to pay.” In other words, it is possible that the state will seek to pass a new law, or put in place a number of bureaucratic hurdles that still interfere with these rights, but do not do so only to collect fees that ex-felons cannot afford to pay.

Contact Our Orlando Civil Rights Attorneys

The decision is a critical step towards ensuring that the state legislature cannot impede citizens’ voting rights simply because they have previous convictions. Still, there is no question that the state will continue to seek to limit voting rights for political reasons.

If you live in Florida and your civil rights have been violated by another party, contact our Orlando civil rights attorneys at the Baez Law Firm today to find out how we can help.



By submitting this form I acknowledge that form submissions via this website do not create an attorney-client relationship, and any information I send is not protected by attorney-client privilege.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Skip footer and go back to main navigation