In Florida, District Court Judge Robert Hinkle passed a limited ruling on Friday that blocks a law, SB 7066, to allow felony-convicted individuals to register for voting without paying the fines and fees of their sentence.
Earlier this year, the Florida legislature passed a law that requires a felon to make restitution payments to victims and finish all payments related to their sentence before becoming eligible to vote. Opponents of the legislation claim that it serves as a “poll tax” for anyone with a felony record. Hinkle’s limited ruling supersedes this requirement. While there are questions of whether or not the ruling is constitutional, Hinkle seems satisfied that the Supreme Court will rule on the issue eventually.
“The state of Florida cannot deny restoration of a felon’s right to vote,” Hinkle wrote, “solely because the felon does not have the financial resources necessary to pay restitution…”
Since the SB 7066 law was enacted last November, it faced criticism from various civil rights organizations claiming it opposed the beliefs of Floridan citizens. The anticipated result of Hinkle’s ruling seems to be that about 1.4 million former prisoners will be incorporated into the voting.
Several civil rights organizations like ACLU, Campaign Legal Center and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed lawsuits against the state to challenge the law. Groups of people who are currently suing the state of Florida have presented studies that show up to 80 percent of felons otherwise eligible to vote still owe money that would prevent them from being allowed.
If people are physically unable to pay their fees and restricted from voting, it introduces another issue. According to Hinkle, the state of Florida needs to introduce a method for people who cannot pay what they owe to be verified to vote. Hinkle also mentioned that the imposition of court fees might become a constitutional issue.
“Florida also cannot deny restoration of a felon’s right to vote,” said Hinkle, “solely because the felon does not have the financial resources to pay the other financial obligations.”
The deputy legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Nancy Abudu, agreed with Hinkle.
“The court made crystal clear today that a returning citizen’s vote cannot be conditioned on their wealth,” Abudu said.
Voting rights groups like Abudu’s believe that requiring payment of fines and fees to be completed prior to voting will deny the rights of many felonious Floridians, or “returning citizens” as the activist groups call them.
The term “poll tax” being used is a reference to the illegal action of demanding voting fees that were used historically to limit African American voting rights. Hinkle mentioned the issue in court, but he has not ruled on whether he agrees a similar discriminatory practice is currently occurring.
According to Florida state records, people with felony records are disproportionately members of the African American community or members of the population with low incomes. That is the data on which the voting rights advocates make the claim that the law is discriminating against marginalized communities and impeding their voting.
