ReportWire

Tag: ron desantis

  • Supreme Court decision sparks new fight in Florida’s social media law dispute

    Supreme Court decision sparks new fight in Florida’s social media law dispute

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    After a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month, Florida and tech-industry groups could be poised to resume a legal battle about a 2021 state law aimed at placing restrictions on social-media platforms.

    Attorneys for the groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which challenged the constitutionality of the law, have filed a motion at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that new briefs should be filed in light of the Supreme Court decision.

    U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle in 2021 issued a preliminary injunction to block the law (SB 7072) on First Amendment grounds, and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of Hinkle’s decision.

    Florida took the case to the Supreme Court, which on July 1 vacated the appeals-court ruling and sent the lawsuit back for further consideration.

    The Supreme Court did not resolve the constitutional issues but said the 11th Circuit and another appeals court in a similar Texas case did not properly consider the “facial nature” of challenges to the laws, a critical element in deciding whether they met constitutional muster.

    “To make that judgment, a court must determine a law’s full set of applications, evaluate which are constitutional and which are not, and compare the one to the other. Neither court performed that necessary inquiry,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the main opinion.

    The tech-industry groups, in the motion Friday at the 11th Circuit, argued that briefs should be filed “so that the parties can address the import of the Supreme Court’s decision, whether this (appeals) court can resolve the facial challenge on this record or whether a remand to the district court is necessary, and if so, whether the preliminary injunction should remain in effect pending any necessary further proceedings.”

    “Indeed, the Supreme Court’s decision expressly contemplates additional proceedings in this court to determine in the first instance whether SB 7072 prohibits a substantial amount of protected speech relative to its plainly legitimate sweep,” attorneys for the groups wrote.

    As of early Thursday afternoon, the state had not filed a response to the motion, according to an online docket. But attorneys for the tech-industry groups wrote that the state opposes the motion.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Republican-controlled Legislature passed the law after Facebook and Twitter, now known as X, blocked former President Donald Trump from their platforms after Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

    The law, in part, sought to limit the ability of social-media platforms such as Facebook and YouTube to moderate content on their sites. As examples of the disputed issues in the case, part of the law would prevent platforms from banning political candidates from their sites and require companies to publish — and apply consistently — standards about issues such as banning users or blocking their content.

    The law seeks to regulate social-media platforms that have annual gross revenue of over $100 million or more than 100 million monthly active users. Companies could face steep penalties for violating restrictions in the law.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • DeSantis declares state of emergency for 54 Florida counties as storm develops

    DeSantis declares state of emergency for 54 Florida counties as storm develops

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday declared a state of emergency for 54 counties, most along the Gulf Coast and in northern Florida, as a tropical wave, Invest 97L, with a high chance of strengthening into a more-threatening storm was on a path that could reach the state this weekend.

    The declaration was for Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford, Calhoun, Charlotte, Citrus, Clay, Collier, Columbia, Dixie, Duval, Escambia, Flagler, Franklin, Gadsden, Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Hernando, Hillsborough, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lake, Lee, Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison, Manatee, Marion, Monroe, Nassau, Okaloosa, Orange, Osceola, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Putnam, Santa Rosa, Sarasota, Seminole, St. Johns, Sumter, Suwannee, Taylor, Union, Volusia, Wakulla, Walton and Washington counties.

    DeSantis’ order, in part, directed Emergency Management Director Kevin Guthrie to coordinate the state’s approach to the storm and any recovery operations. The National Hurricane Center said the wave, called Invest 97L, caused showers and thunderstorms over Hispaniola, Puerto Rico and the Southeastern Bahamas on Thursday afternoon.

    Development of the system is expected to be slow while it moves over parts of the Greater Antilles. But the hurricane center said conditions are conducive for the storm to develop into a tropical depression after clearing the Greater Antilles and move into the eastern Gulf of Mexico this weekend or early next week.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Former state GOP chair Sen. Joe Gruters backs Florida marijuana legalization

    Former state GOP chair Sen. Joe Gruters backs Florida marijuana legalization

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Sarasota GOP state Sen. and former Republican Party of Florida Chairman Joe Gruters is endorsing Amendment 3, the proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would legalize recreational cannabis for adults 21 years and older.

    In doing so, he is going up against Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Republican Party of Florida, who formally came out in opposition to the proposal in May.

    In an interview, Gruters explained why he was coming out now to support the amendment.

    “It’s based on a lot of conversations that I had with constituents and people that are in the process,” he told the Phoenix. “To me it’s a realization of where we are, where we’re at as a society, what people are doing, what’s happened with medical marijuana over all, and I think it’s just been an evolving decision to which I said, ‘Let’s come out and support it. Let’s try to help this win and let’s get ahead of this to make sure we do it right.’”

    Gruters is the highest ranked Republican in the Legislature to announce his support for the measure. A certified public accountant, he chaired the Republican Party of Florida from 2019 to 2023. He has served in the Florida Legislature since 2016 – serving one term as a representative before being elected to the state Senate in 2022.

    When asked about the fact that Republican Party of Florida is opposing the measure, Gruters said, “The party should take positions that they believe, although I personally disagree on this personal subject.”

    He’s also an ally of former President Donald Trump and served as Florida co-chairman of Trump’s 2016 campaign. After Gruters became one of the few GOP members of the Legislature to endorse Trump over DeSantis in the 2024 GOP presidential primary, the governor vetoed several of his projects in the 2023-2024 fiscal year budget.

    “Simply because I support his political opponent, the governor chose to punish ordinary Floridians who want better water quality, less traffic congestion, and increased resources for disabled children to find gainful employment,” Gruters told Florida Politics last year. “It’s mean-spirited acts like this that are defining him here and across the country.”

    DeSantis has been explicit about how much he disdains Amendment 3 and has said he will do what he can to topple the measure this fall. That includes raising money through his Florida Freedom Fund political committee.

    “This state will start to smell like marijuana in our cities and counties. It will reduce the quality of life,” the governor said days after the Florida Supreme Court approved putting the measure on the November ballot.

    But Gruters, who worked for years on getting a bill passed that bans smoking on public beaches in Florida, said that he has “full faith and confidence that the governor and the Legislature can put up guardrails to make sure that we do it right.”

    “I’m confident that we can do it,” he said. “Like, I said, I do not like smoking in public. Listen, it took a long time to pass that [law] to give the power back to communities to be able to get rid of it on beaches. We can control the timing, the place, and all that with legislation. That’s what I think we need to focus on, and I think that we can get that right in Florida.”

    “We are honored to have Sen. Gruters’ support, yet another example of the expansive coalition behind legalizing recreational adult use marijuana,” said Morgan Hill, spokesperson for Smart & Safe Florida. “Individual liberty is not a partisan issue, and we’re glad to have Sen. Gruters on board to help spread our message of personal freedom and a safer Florida for all.”

    Cops in opposition

    While Gruters’ endorsement is a coup for the pro-Amendment 3 campaign, two major law enforcement organizations this week declared their opposition to the proposed amendment.

    “The well-being and health of the citizens of Florida are threatened through the legalization and normalization of recreational marijuana,” said Florida Sheriffs Association President and Charlotte County Sheriff Bill Prummel in a statement. “Our priority is the safety and security of our communities, and the data clearly shows that legalization leads to increased public health issues, road safety concerns, and a rise in youth marijuana use.”

    Also opposing the measure is the Florida Police Chiefs Association, composed of more than 1,300 of Florida’s top law enforcement executives.

    “As we represent the highest levels of law enforcement leadership in Florida, we believe that passage of Constitutional Amendment 3 ‘Adult Use of Marijuana’ – otherwise known as recreational marijuana – will hurt public safety and ultimately cost Floridians tax dollars and lives,” said Florida Police Chiefs Association President Chief Charles Vazquez in a statement.

    The story has been updated with comments from Sen. Gruters.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: [email protected]. Follow Florida Phoenix on Facebook and Twitter.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Mitch Perry, Florida Phoenix

    Source link

  • Is another far-right candidate running for Orange County School Board in 2024? Here’s what we know

    Is another far-right candidate running for Orange County School Board in 2024? Here’s what we know

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Orlando Weekly

    Mailer from the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee warning voters against school board candidate Jeni Grieger.

    Orange County has four school board seats up for re-election in 2024, and there is one race in particular that is drawing concern from liberals over past comments, social media posts and affiliations that indicate one candidate’s support for right-wing policies.

    Jeni Grieger, a former teacher and political newcomer running for Orange County School Board District 6, has been accused by her opponents of being affiliated with Moms for Liberty, a far-right “parental rights” organization.

    Founded in Florida in 2021, Moms for Liberty has historically organized in favor of anti-LGBTQ policies in schools, including the removal of books from school libraries that they deem inappropriate (often, but not always containing LGBTQ+ themes) and anti-trans rules regarding bathroom and locker use. 

    Orange County already has one Moms for Liberty member on the school board: Alicia Farrant, a first-term school board member elected in 2022 to represent District 4. Farrant has argued in favor of restricting access to books she describes as “filth” and has spoken out against efforts by other board members to ensure schools are inclusive toward LGBTQ+ students, amid an onslaught of anti-transgender policies championed by Republican state officials.

    Grieger, when questioned by Orlando Weekly about her affiliation with Moms for Liberty, among other policy positions, declined an interview request via an email response through an unnamed spokesperson.

    In her response, Grieger denied accusations of her alleged affiliation with Moms for Liberty, despite supporting similar positions as the group on issues such as COVID-19 protocols in schools and the treatment of transgender students.

    “While my opponent has hobnobbed for months with politicians and political groups, I have remained focused on how I can support the students, faculty, staff, and ultimately the community of Orange County Public Schools by knocking on doors and meeting with community members and I have not joined a political group of any sorts and have not been endorsed by Moms For Liberty,” Grieger wrote in a statement.

    “This is a narrative being pushed out by my opposition because they represent the status quo and don’t want to talk about the crisis that’s happening in our schools,” she continued, in a response that is identical to one she shared with a dubious resident on Facebook. “I am not a member of moms for liberty and have not been endorsed by moms for liberty. I’m a mom for literacy,” Grieger wrote.

    A recent paid advertisement mailed to voters on behalf of the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee, obtained by Orlando Weekly, indicates otherwise.

    One recent mailer, for instance, describes Grieger — a registered Republican — as a “book banner” and places her alongside Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis standing behind a lectern with a Moms for Liberty sign.

    click to enlarge Mailer from the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee warning voters against school board candidate Jeni Grieger. - Photo via Orlando Weekly

    Photo via Orlando Weekly

    Mailer from the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee warning voters against school board candidate Jeni Grieger.

    click to enlarge Mailer from the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee warning voters against school board candidate Jeni Grieger. - Photo via Orlando Weekly

    Photo via Orlando Weekly

    Mailer from the Orange County Democratic Executive Committee warning voters against school board candidate Jeni Grieger.

    Grieger’s opponent Stephanie Vanos, a registered Democrat, has also described Grieger as a Moms for Liberty-aligned candidate. Grieger has not officially received the endorsement of the group, nor has DeSantis.

    Both Vanos and Grieger are running for an open seat on the school board currently occupied by Karen Castor Dentel, who will run for Orange County Supervisor of Elections this year.

    This leaves the seat in what is officially identified as a nonpartisan race up for grabs.

    Is Grieger as extremist as her opponents say?

    Grieger, a mother of three young boys, is a former public school teacher who taught various courses at Lake Mary High School in Seminole County, ranging from economics to American government, from 2002 to 2013, according to her LinkedIn profile.

    She’s a registered Republican running for a nonpartisan seat in a district that leans Democratic. According to county elections office data, her school board district had 58,425 registered Democrats, 36,112 registered Republicans, and 35, 452 voters registered as “No Party Affiliated” as of June.

    Grieger has largely kept politicized language off her social media campaign accounts and campaign website. The number one issue emphasized repeatedly by Grieger’s campaign is school literacy rates, which she argues are not up to par.

    “Our campaign has been focused on literacy since day one, and I am glad the literacy rate of OCPS has received so much attention from my supporters as well
    as my opponent and their supporters,” Grieger told Orlando Weekly.  “While OCPS teachers are allowed to use structured literacy training as part of their personal development points, it is not the standard OCPS uses, and we need to make that our top priority.”

    Grieger has specifically stressed a desire for the school district to use “science based literacy programs.” When asked by the Weekly for clarification on this term, Grieger described this as a form of reading that comes from “decades of research in fields including brain science that point to effective strategies for teaching kids to read.”

    “This science is incredibly crucial for our students who struggle with learning how to read,” she added, linking to an online phonics program titled We Can All Read.

    More controversial than her stated desire to boost student literacy, however, are her positions on social and so-called culture-war issues.

    In a candidate survey for the Christian-affiliated iVoterGuide, Grieger demonstrated support for several right-wing positions, including common anti-LGBTQ+ talking points.  iVoterGuide, a division of the conservative and Christian fundamentalist American Family Association (AFA) Action, describes itself as “the nation’s largest candidate research organization focused exclusively on information and mobilizing voters with biblical values.”

    In her questionnaire, Grieger for instance stated support for teaching abstinence in schools’ sex-ed, leaving resources for an unwanted pregnancy out of schools, and stated that she disagrees with supporting the concept of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

    In addition, she shared that she “strongly agree[s]” with forbidding “biological males” from participating in women’s sports or accessing other gender-specific spaces for women, including bathrooms and locker rooms — echoing the sentiment of other right-wing elected officials and Moms for Liberty.

    “Biological females deserve to feel safe while competing and while in a changing room, as do biological males,” Grieger told Orlando Weekly.  “Forcing biological females to
    share their private spaces with biological males is not fair.”

    Like the Moms for Liberty-affiliated school board member Alicia Farrant, Grieger seems to struggle on the issue of transgender rights, despite voicing acceptance of all students. On the social media platform X, Grieger’s campaign account recently wrote “Disgusting” in response to a post by Riley Gaines on U.S. House Democrats’ opposition to an attempt to block new Title IX regulations.

    click to enlarge Screenshot of a July 11, 2024 social media post by school board candidate Jeni Grieger in response to a post by an anti-transgender rights activist on Title IX regulations. - Image via X

    Image via X

    Screenshot of a July 11, 2024 social media post by school board candidate Jeni Grieger in response to a post by an anti-transgender rights activist on Title IX regulations.

    Such regulations, announced by the Biden-Harris Administration, aim to in part provide greater protections for LGBTQ+ students. Gaines, a former competitive swimmer, is known as an anti-transgender activist who has compared transgender identities to “spiritual warfare.”

    On same-sex marriages, Grieger shared agreement with the position that marriage is “a God-ordained, sacred and legal union of one man and one woman,” but explained that she also plans to “fight” for all students regardless.

    “As a school board member, I will respect and treat all families well. I will fight for all students to get a strong education whatever their family looks like. Some families are man and woman, and some families have same sex parents, single parents, no parents and are raised by family, friends, or guardians- no matter what, I will fight for the education!” her response reads.

    Grieger, who is friendly with Farrant, was also photographed at a recent Pine Hills community event alongside DeSantis-appointed state attorney Andrew Bain and local Republican Willie Montague. The trio also hosted a community town hall together in June.

    Alicia Farrant, in a Facebook post about the Pine Hills event, displaying the three, commented, “I love this!!! Powerhouse leaders right here!”

    Montague, a repeat candidate for elected office who is vying (again) for a U.S. Congress seat currently held by Orlando’s Maxwell Frost, has been known to associate with far-right blogger and Proud Boys associate Jacob Engels, and aligns himself with the Make America Great Again (MAGA) wing of the Republican Party.  According to a Facebook video, Engels and Montague participated in an anti-abortion counter-protest together back in 2022.

    On public health regulations, Grieger in her iVoteGuide candidate survey shared that she “strongly disagree[s]” with school districts mandating health precautions, including masks and vaccines, to “protect students and staff” in the event of a pandemic.

    Moms for Liberty, founded the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, built its base in part through mobilizing parents opposed to student mask mandates and quarantine policies implemented to protect students and staff from a deadly illness.

    Furthermore, Grieger has also received the backing of Brittney Jones, a local political activist and real estate agent affiliated with the anti-vax Florida Freedom Keepers group. Jones, who also serves as co-founder of the ‘America-First’ group Florida Christian Patriots, similarly backed Farrant during her 2022 campaign for the county school board.

    Grieger’s opponent Stephanie Vanos did not submit questionnaire responses to iVoterGuide, which nonetheless identified Vanos as a “liberal” candidate.

    Getting past the ‘culture wars’

     When reached for comment by Orlando Weekly Tuesday, local mom and public schools advocate Stephanie Vanos criticized her opponent’s positions on issues that align with far-right groups.

    “I have been an engaged member of this community for over twenty years and have spent the last fifteen months of my campaign talking with District 6 community members,” Vanos shared. “Her answers, supporters, and financial backers highlight her alignment with the Moms for Liberty agenda and do not reflect the values of our community.”

    Vanos, who is leading in fundraising efforts by by nearly three-to-one, has campaigned on creating a “safe, welcoming learning environment” for students. Her policy platform also advocates for eliminating “culture wars and political agendas” in classrooms, according to her campaign website, by focusing on issues students, staff, and parents “actually care about,” naming as examples improvements to district operations, access to quality academic counseling and workforce opportunities, and efficient use of public funds.

    Unlike Grieger, Vanos’ campaign boasts a full slate of local and state endorsements, including endorsements from the Florida Democratic Party, the Orange County teachers’ union, Orlando mayor Buddy Dyer, and organizations such as the Equality Florida PAC and the Central Florida Hotel & Lodging Association.

    Both Vanos and Grieger have expressed a desire to address issues such as teacher retention, safety in classrooms, and better compensation for teachers. According to national rankings by the National Education Association, Florida ranks near-dead last in the country for average teacher pay — an issue that teachers’ unions (like the NEA) say has played a key role in persuading some teachers to leave the profession or the state.

    School board elections in Florida are currently nonpartisan, meaning they’ll show up on the ballot of all voters in memes’ respective districts, regardless of political affiliation. Each member of the school board serves four-year terms.

    Florida’s Primary Election is scheduled for August 20, 2024, while the General Election date is scheduled for Nov. 5. You can find more information about voting dates or how to vote-by-mail on the Orange County Supervisor of Elections Office website.

    Grieger’s full statement

    Grieger, the candidate accused by her opponents of being far-right, “respectfully” requested that we include her full statement to Orlando Weekly, in full context without editing. Here’s her full, lengthy statement:

    The term “science-based” reading refers to decades of research in fields including brain science that point to effective strategies for teaching kids to read. This science is incredibly crucial for our students who struggle with learning how to read. Kareem Weaver of the NAACP once stated, “Illiteracy is the pipeline to incarceration.” Please understand that when children can’t read, they become anxious and insecure and behavior issues soon follow. As the only teacher running for OCPS School Board District 6, I am passionate about this subject because I have first hand experience in this area, and what works. I’d be happy to discuss this subject further, or if you’d like to research for yourself, here is a good place to start.

    Everything I do for kids comes from love and care for all of them. ALL students, should have the greatest protections and be kept safe at all times and in all environments. As the only teacher in this race, I have the experience to create a safe and positive learning environment for ALL students. As the daughter of a police officer who spent countless hours off duty serving the most vulnerable parts of our community, I grew up with a servants heart that wants every single member of our amazing community to be successful.

    Biological females deserve to feel safe while competing and while in a changing room, as do biological males. Forcing biological females to share their private spaces with biological males is not fair. Can we work together to find a meaningful solution and create safe spaces for all , while not taking away from other spaces ? I believe we can lovingly engage together, and find a place to make all these students feel seen and safe . Payton McNabb suffers long term physical and mental illness from a volleyball match where a biological male who identifies as transgender injured her. There are many biological women who have been injured by biological males in sports, so I propose we work with the transgender community for a solution where everyone can be safe.

    Our campaign has been focused on literacy since day one, and I am glad the literacy rate of OCPS has received so much attention from my supporters as well as my opponent and their supporters. I’m thankful that all the information I have been putting out there has grabbed the attention of so many. While OCPS teachers are allowed to use structured literacy training as part of their personal development points, it is not the standard OCPS uses, and we need to make that our top priority.

    While my opponent has hobnobbed for months with politicians and political
    groups, I have remained focused on how I can support the students, faculty, staff,
    and ultimately the community of Orange County Public Schools by knocking on doors and meeting with community members and I have not joined a political group of any sorts and have not been endorsed by Moms For Liberty. This is a narrative being pushed out by my opposition because they represent the status quo and don’t want to talk about the crisis that’s happening in our schools. The fact is, a majority of our students cannot read and we have struggling schools in District 6. Just look at College Park Middle School and Lake Silver Elementary and how many families feel compelled to flee those schools. I will work to fix that. I am not a member of moms for liberty and have not been endorsed by moms for liberty. I’m a mom for literacy.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    McKenna Schueler

    Source link

  • Federal judge sides with Florida in public-employee union restriction fight

    Federal judge sides with Florida in public-employee union restriction fight

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    A federal judge has rejected much of a lawsuit challenging restrictions that Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Legislature placed on public-employee unions — but a fight will continue about a ban on deducting union dues from workers’ paychecks.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker last week issued an 80-page decision that largely sided with the state Public Employees Relations Commission, which is in charge of carrying out the controversial restrictions. The Republican-controlled Legislature and DeSantis approved the restrictions in 2023 and made revisions this year.

    Unions representing public-school and university employees filed the lawsuit last year and raised a series of constitutional arguments. Along with preventing government agencies from continuing a decades-old practice of deducting union dues from workers’ paychecks, lawmakers made changes related to “membership authorization” forms and rules affecting recertification of unions.

    Adding to the controversy, lawmakers exempted unions representing law-enforcement officers and firefighters from the changes. Those unions in recent years have often backed Republican candidates, while teachers unions and other public-employee unions frequently support Democrats.

    The lawsuit included seven counts, with Walker ruling that the unions did not have legal standing to pursue two of the counts and granting summary judgment to the Public Employees Relations Commission on four others.

    Walker, however, ruled that a trial should be held on one count that alleges the ban on dues deductions from paychecks violates what is known as the Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That allegation stems from existing collective bargaining agreements that included agencies deducting union dues from paychecks.

    “In short, the undisputed evidence is that the payroll deduction ban substantially undermines the bargain in the union plaintiffs’ CBAs (collective bargaining agreements) by eliminating an agreed-upon method of dues collection — payroll deduction,” Walker wrote.

    Walker concluded that “the payroll deduction ban substantially impairs the CBAs,” but he said he also has to consider whether the “payroll deduction ban is drawn in an appropriate, reasonable way to advance a significant, legitimate public purpose.”

    As a result, he said he needed to consider the issue during a trial, rather than ruling on it with a summary judgment.

    Walker, however, backed the Public Employees Relations Commission on other issues. Among other things, the unions argued that the dues-deduction and membership-form changes violated constitutional equal-protection rights because they did not also apply to public-safety unions.

    Walker wrote, for example, that the plaintiffs “assert that the membership authorization form provision violates the Equal Protection Clause by unjustifiably discriminating against ‘disfavored’ unions. Specifically, they argue that this provision burdens most classes of unions, which generally opposed Gov. Ron DeSantis’ successful 2022 gubernatorial campaign, but exempts public safety unions (at least those unions certified as bargaining representatives), which generally supported it.”

    But Walker cited arguments by Republican lawmakers that the forms would help provide information to union members and said he was bound by a legal standard known as a “rational basis” review. He wrote that the “membership authorization form provision is rationally related to the legitimate government interest of ensuring public employees know their unions and their union rights” and that an exemption was allowed for public-safety unions.

    “This court recognizes the frustration plaintiffs may feel toward this conclusion,” Walker wrote. “The Equal Protection Clause has long restrained the government from pushing one group below another, yet it permits the state of Florida to do just that to the bulk of its public employee unions. But this court cannot rewrite equal protection law or ignore the low bar that rational basis review presents.”

    The changes drew heavy debate during the 2023 legislative session, with union members from throughout the state converging on the Capitol. Republican lawmakers argued that the changes would increase transparency for union members, but opponents described them as an attempt at “union busting.”

    Unions argued that the ban on withholding dues from paychecks would force them to use other, more-difficult methods to collect money from members. The membership authorization forms drew criticism, in part, because of wording required by the state that many union members found objectionable.

    Also, the changes required unions to be recertified as bargaining agents if fewer than 60 percent of eligible employees have submitted the membership authorization forms and paid dues.

    Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the Florida Education Association, the United Faculty of Florida, unions representing employees of the Alachua County, Hernando County, Lafayette County and Pinellas County school districts and the University of Florida and UF professor Malini Schueller. Defendants are members of the Public Employees Relations Commission, members of the University of Florida Board of Trustees and the school boards in Alachua, Hernando and Pinellas counties.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Fight over Florida’s abortion amendment statement heads to the Supreme Court

    Fight over Florida’s abortion amendment statement heads to the Supreme Court

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo by Matt Keller Lehman

    The Yes on 4 rally and March at Lake Eola Park

    A political committee leading efforts to pass a constitutional amendment on abortion rights has asked the Florida Supreme Court to invalidate a revised “financial impact statement” that would appear on the November ballot with the initiative.

    The Floridians Protecting Freedom committee on Wednesday filed a petition contending that House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, and Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples, did not have the authority to direct a panel to revise the statement after a circuit judge rejected an earlier version.

    Financial impact statements provide estimated effects of proposed constitutional amendments on government revenues and the state budget. A panel known as the Financial Impact Estimating Conference issued a revised statement July 15, but Floridians Protecting Freedom contends the statement is politicized and inaccurate.

    The petition filed at the Supreme Court said the statement could have only been revised after a court order, not because of direction from state leaders.

    “The state’s lack of authority to unilaterally revise a financial impact statement does make good sense,” Floridians Protecting Freedom attorneys wrote. “Consider the chaos caused by the alternative: The state could change financial impact statements on a whim, at any time, for any reason — providing sponsors, litigants, and the public little or no time to digest the statements or to challenge them before they are irrevocably placed on the ballot.”

    The Financial Impact Estimating Conference released an initial statement for the proposed amendment in November 2023. But on April 1, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that allowed a six-week abortion limit to take effect.

    Floridians Protecting Freedom filed a lawsuit on April 5 arguing that the November financial-impact statement needed to be revised because it was outdated after the Supreme Court ruling. Leon County Circuit Judge John Cooper agreed and ordered the Financial Impact Estimating Conference to draft a new version.

    State lawyers appealed, arguing that Cooper did not have legal authority to issue such an order. Amid the appeal, Renner and Passidomo directed the Financial Impact Estimating Conference to revamp the statement.

    The revised statement led the 1st District Court of Appeal on Monday to dismiss the pending legal case, saying it was moot.

    “The result is that, absent this (Supreme) Court’s intervention, the state intends to place a Financial Impact Statement on the ballot that is plainly misleading in contravention (of a Supreme Court precedent and a section of state law) and the circuit court order,” Wednesday’s petition said. “But here’s the thing. This (Supreme) Court need not — and should not — sanction this unlawful outcome, for one very simple reason: The state never had the power to reconvene the conference and revise the statement outside the parameters established by the circuit court.”

    The proposed constitutional amendment will appear on the ballot as Amendment 4. It says, in part, that no “law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

    Gov. Ron DeSantis and other state Republican leaders are fighting the proposed amendment. Representatives of DeSantis and the House spearheaded controversial revisions in the financial impact statement.

    In part, the revised statement says there is “uncertainty about whether the amendment will require the state to subsidize abortions with public funds. Litigation to resolve those and other uncertainties will result in additional costs to the state government and state courts that will negatively impact the state budget. An increase in abortions may negatively affect the growth of state and local revenues over time. Because the fiscal impact of increased abortions on state and local revenues and costs cannot be estimated with precision, the total impact of the proposed amendment is indeterminate.”

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • WATCH LIVE: Gov. Ron DeSantis holds news conference with DCF secretary in Aventura

    WATCH LIVE: Gov. Ron DeSantis holds news conference with DCF secretary in Aventura

    [ad_1]

    AVENTURA, Fla. – Gov. Ron DeSantis held a news conference Thursday morning with Florida Department of Children and Families Secretary Shevaun Harris.

    The conference was held at Mo’s Bagels & Deli in Aventura.

    DeSantis said since he has been Florida’s governor, there has not been one “red cent” raised towards college tuition for in-state students.

    He reiterated that there is no sales tax on any baby item in the state of Florida.

    DeSantis also confirmed Miami-Dade and Broward counties received an ‘A’ rating.

    It is unclear what topic or topics will be discussed.

    Local 10 News viewers can watch the news conference, expected to begin at 10:15 a.m., in the video below.

    This is a developing story. Watch Local 10 News at noon or refresh the page for the latest updates.

    Copyright 2024 by WPLG Local10.com – All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    Ryan Mackey

    Source link

  • Florida lays out details about new law banning kids from social media

    Florida lays out details about new law banning kids from social media

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Colin Hackley/NSF

    House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, made a priority of passing the law (HB 3) during this year’s legislative session, citing what he said are harms to children from social media.

    Facing potential First Amendment challenges, Florida has proposed details about how it will carry out a new law aimed at keeping children off social-media platforms and blocking minors from accessing online pornography.

    Attorney General Ashley Moody’s office on Tuesday published three proposed rules that include addressing one of the most closely watched issues in the law: age verification.

    House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, made a priority of passing the law (HB 3) during this year’s legislative session, citing what he said are harms to children from social media. Technology industry groups have argued that parts of the law, including its age-verification requirements, would violate First Amendment rights.

    The law, which will take effect Jan. 1, seeks to prevent children under age 16 from opening social-media accounts on at least some platforms — though it would allow parents to give consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts. Children under 14 could not open accounts. It also requires age verification to try to prevent minors under age 18 from having access to online pornographic sites.

    The social-media restrictions have drawn most of the attention, and the law largely puts the onus on platforms to verify the ages of users. It says that “knowing or reckless” violations could lead to the attorney general’s office filing lawsuits against platforms for unfair and deceptive trade practices. Also, platforms could face lawsuits filed on behalf of minors.

    One of proposed rules published Tuesday says that willful “disregard of a person’s age constitutes a knowing or reckless violation” of the social-media restrictions.

    “A social media platform willfully disregards a person’s age if it, based on the facts or circumstance readily available to the respondent (platform), should reasonably have been aroused to question whether the person was a child and thereafter failed to perform reasonable age verification,” the proposed rule says.

    The proposal adds that the attorney general’s office will “not find willful disregard of a person’s age has occurred if a social media platform establishes it has utilized a reasonable age verification method with respect to all who access the social media platform and that reasonable age verification method determined that the person was not a child unless the social media platform later obtained actual knowledge that the person was a child and failed to act.”

    The proposed rules also address what is described as “reasonable parental verification” that could come into play, for instance, if parents want to consent for 14- and 15-year-old children to have access to social-media platforms.

    One of the rules defines reasonable parental verification as “any method that is reasonably calculated at determining that a person is a parent of a child that also verifies the age and identity of that parent by commercially reasonable means.”

    That could include methods such as platforms requesting from children the names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of parents; contacting the people whose names were provided by the children to seek information and confirmation; and “utilizing any commercially reasonable method regularly used by the government or business to verify” parents’ identities and ages.

    The law, which Gov. Ron DeSantis signed in late March, does not identify social-media platforms that would be affected by the restrictions. But it includes a definition of such platforms, with criteria related to such things as algorithms, “addictive features” and allowing users to view the content or activities of other users.

    Renner and other key supporters of the law argue that social-media companies have created addictive platforms that harm children’s mental health and can lead to sexual predators communicating with minors. But critics, including tech-industry groups, have argued the bill is unconstitutional and pointed to courts blocking similar legislation in other states.

    Before DeSantis signed the law, the tech-industry group NetChoice sent a letter to him that contended the measure was unconstitutional for a series of reasons, including its age-verification requirements.

    “Age-verification schemes for the internet are blatantly unconstitutional,” Carl Szabo, the organization’s vice president and general counsel, wrote in the March 7 letter. “Because the internet is home to significant amounts of First Amendment speech, users should not be forced to forfeit their anonymity in order to access it.”

    As DeSantis signed the law in March, Renner said he expected NetChoice to file a lawsuit. But Renner, an attorney, expressed confidence that the state would win in court and cited dangers of social media to children.

    “This is an issue where we can no longer stand on the sidelines because of what we know,” he said.

    Tuesday’s publishing of the proposed rules in the Florida Administrative Register could lead to a hearing before the rules are finalized. Rules are commonly used in state government to flesh out details after laws pass.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • ‘Clown show’: Florida Democrats respond to Rubio, Scott and DeSantis RNC speeches

    ‘Clown show’: Florida Democrats respond to Rubio, Scott and DeSantis RNC speeches

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    The Florida Democratic Party called Tuesday evening’s Republican National Convention speeches from Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sens. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio “a clown show” and a “circus.”

    “The Republican Party can preach ‘unity’ all night long but the only thing they are united on is sending America backwards,” Democrati chair Nikki Fried said in a news release Wednesday following what she called “Florida Night” at the RNC.

    The three took the stage during the second day of the convention in Milwaukee, where the party has nominated former President Donald Trump as its candidate for president.

    DeSantis took the stage that evening and expressed support for Trump, with whom he’d traded jabs before dropping out of the primaries.

    DeSantis called President Joe Biden a “figurehead” and touted his own success in boosting Republican voter registration in the state, plus his COVID-19 response, attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, and support for “parental rights” in education.

    Fried said DeSantis “recycled old talking points from his failed presidential campaign.”

    She criticized the senators, too, highlighting that Scott was absent from recent votes taken in the Senate and that Rubio “limped” on stage following the announcement that he would not be Trump’s vice-presidential candidate.

    Scott spoke for just over five minutes, rounding it out with a call to voters to courageously support Trump.

    “Donald Trump has given up a lot for this country,” Scott said. “His family has been slandered, he’s been impeached, censored, treated as a criminal, all because he never backs down. This week he has shown the courage all of us should display as we rally around him to rescue our great country.”

    Scott said he had a “not far-fetched nightmare” that Biden won a second term, whereupon gas prices rose $10, only rich people could buy groceries, and Democrats rigged elections.

    All three Florida Republicans dwelled on border security and inflation, asking convention-goers to recall how much everyday items cost during the Trump compared to the Biden presidencies.

    Rubio’s speech called for an “America first” attitude, and he gave a shoutout to Trump’s pick for vice president, U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance, a Republican representing Ohio. Rubio said Vance reminds “us we are all descendants of ordinary people who achieve extraordinary things.”

    DeSantis called for increased border security, universal school choice, “a strong, focused” military, and lowering taxes.

    U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds made an appearance on Monday. He spent the bulk of his time advocating for school choice.

    Fried argued that electing Biden would lead to true unity.

    “These dangerous and extreme policies are the backbone of the modern Republican Party and represent a vision for America that threatens to take us back to a time when we had fewer rights,” Fried said.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: [email protected]. Follow Florida Phoenix on Facebook and Twitter.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jay Waagmeester, Florida Phoenix

    Source link

  • An open letter to Gov. DeSantis from Orlando and Tampa Fringe festival staff

    An open letter to Gov. DeSantis from Orlando and Tampa Fringe festival staff

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Orlando Fringe/Facebook

    Dear Governor DeSantis,

    Like you, we the Orlando and Tampa Fringe festivals care greatly about the citizens of Florida. Given that common ground, we hope that you read this letter with an open mind and fully consider the proposal below.

    We assume you did not veto the funding of science centers, aquariums, operas, zoos, children’s programs, and other arts and culture programming lightly, and that much of what has transpired since the June 27th press conference is a misunderstanding. One of the goals of this letter, then, is to clear up some of those misunderstandings.

    First, it is important to note that Fringe Festivals are performing arts festivals. We absolutely are not sexual festivals. The genres of performance range widely, but typically include storytelling, theatre, improvisation, circus, dance, comedy, etc. We diligently watch for age appropriateness and ensure that a show with adult content is age-rated accordingly. Through content indicators such as age, we empower our guests to make informed decisions and self-curate their experiences. No one is ever forced or coerced to see a show against their will.

    Equally important is the distinction between uncensored and unlawful. Our festivals are uncensored, not unlawful. While a fraction of the work at our festivals *could be adults only, we and the artists operate within the law, including decency requirements. We say *could because Fringe artists are selected through a lottery-type drawing, thus it is literally the luck of the draw as to whether adult content is a part of these festivals. We as festival producers do not put our thumb on the selection scale though we proudly provide a platform for any and all artists to share their work.

    Second, it is important that Florida taxpayers understand that their tax dollars do not pay Fringe artists. Artists earn their income directly through ticket sales. In fact, 100% of an artist’s advertised ticket price is paid to that artist. Instead, taxpayer dollars help with office expenses, ADA accommodations, and staff salaries (i.e., tax paying Floridians).

    More to that point, Florida’s arts & culture sector generates around $176M in State Tax Revenue; a 550% return on a $26M investment. It could be said, then, that the vetoed $32M is but a small reinvestment into the organizations that help generate significant earned income for the state. (Source: Americans for the Arts’ Arts & Economic Prosperity (AEP6, 2022))

    Defunding Florida’s entire arts & culture sector because of Fringe Festivals, which account for just .002% of the vetoed $32M, is akin to canceling Florida’s entire sports industry based on an objection with one player on one team.

    Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the many worthy organizations that have been negatively impacted by the veto are critical parts of the social, educational, and financial landscape of their respective communities. Their loss or diminishment will have serious ripple effects. As programs get reduced or cut, so too may salaries, which impact grocers, restaurants, auto shops, tithing and other charitable giving.

    With all this in mind, we implore you, sir, to consider the following proposal:

    Governor DeSantis, we the undersigned Fringe Festivals, which remain committed to providing inclusive spaces for artists and audiences, agree on a non-precedent setting basis, to forego the 2025 state grants that were approved for us in order to facilitate the restoration of the remaining legislature-approved arts & culture funding, provided you champion a successful reversal or override of the veto. In addition, we will welcome and host you, your family, and some of your aides when you attend our festivals in 2025, and we ask that you reciprocate by welcoming and hosting us in October or November 2024 so that we can build bridges of understanding and deepen your familiarity with the benefits of arts & culture investments, thus empowering you to be an impassioned advocate.

    In that the fiscal year of many arts & culture organizations began July 1, time is of the essence. We look forward to working with you for the betterment of all Florida citizens.

    Respectfully,
    Scott Galbraith, Interim Executive Director of the Orlando Fringe
    Trish Parry, Festival Producer of Tampa Fringe
    Tempestt Halstead, Festival Producer of the Orlando Fringe

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Scott Galbraith, Trish Parry and Tempestt Halstead

    Source link

  • DeSantis vetoes Florida vacation rental bill, calling it ‘bureaucratic red tape’

    DeSantis vetoes Florida vacation rental bill, calling it ‘bureaucratic red tape’

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday vetoed a measure aimed at regulating vacation rentals, saying the proposal would create “bureaucratic red tape” for local officials.

    Oversight of vacation rentals for years has been a thorny issue for the Legislature, as advertising for properties on platforms such as Airbnb has ballooned.

    This year’s bill (SB 280) — a priority of Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples — also was contentious, with the Senate voting 23-16 to approve it and the House passing it in a 60-51 vote in the waning days of the legislative session.

    Champions of short-term rentals say they provide extra income for homeowners and boost tourism, while critics complain that noise, trash, and traffic woes from a revolving cast of visitors negatively transform neighborhoods.

    DeSantis’ veto drew mixed reactions.

    “This is a difficult issue that has property owners on both sides who deserve a voice in the process,” Senate bill sponsor Nick DiCeglie, R-Indian Rocks Beach, said in a text message. “We worked hard to pass legislation through both the Senate and the House that took the concerns of all stakeholders into consideration. While I disagree with the governor’s decision, I understand his concerns.”

    But Melbourne Beach Mayor Alison Dennington called DeSantis’ veto “wonderful.”

    “It seems like he’s recognizing that there should be some local registration, that we should be allowed to have it, and that this went too far,” Dennington told The News Service of Florida.

    Dennington suggested DeSantis create a work group to explore the issue.

    “I would love it if he would form some kind of task force with some legislators and some local officials and some building officials, like a regional task force, and maybe we could come back and propose better legislation next year. That would make both sides happy on some of these issues,” the mayor said.

    The bill addressed one of the key sticking points over the years — “preempting” regulation of short-term rental properties to the state.

    Current law bans local ordinances or regulations passed after 2011 that prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of rentals, doing away with registration programs adopted by many coastal communities as the use of online platforms such as Airbnb expanded.

    The bill would have preempted regulation of vacation rentals to the state while allowing local governments to have short-term rental registration programs that met certain parameters for what the local programs could require. The bill would have “grandfathered” in regulations adopted by counties before 2016 — an exception that applied only to Flagler County, home to House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast.

    The bill would have prevented local governments “from enforcing existing ordinances or passing any new local measure which would exclusively apply to vacation rentals,” DeSantis wrote in a veto message Thursday.

    “Under the bill, any such measure must apply to all residential properties. The effect of this provision will prevent virtually all local regulation of vacation rentals even though the vacation rental markets are far from uniform across the various regions of the state,” the governor wrote. “Going forward, I encourage the Florida Legislature and all key stakeholders to work together, with the understanding that vacation rentals should not be approached as a one-size-fits-all issue.”

    The vacation-rental bill sparked a clash between two powerful industry groups in the runup to DeSantis’ veto.

    The bill drew intense opposition from vacation-rental management companies, coastal community leaders and Florida Realtors, an influential real-estate industry group whose members urged DeSantis to nix the measure.

    “The bill fails to strike a fair balance between the rights of private property owners to rent their property on a short-term basis and the ability of local governments to regulate these rentals,” a website set up by Florida Realtors said. The website allowed visitors to submit emails detailing complaints about the bill directly to the governor’s office.

    Meanwhile, the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association, also a politically prominent industry group, corralled its members to appeal to the governor to sign the bill.

    “We were proud to work with the bill sponsors and have this important legislation pass this session as a solid framework and first step for regulatory reform in the sector,” Carol Dover, president and CEO of the Restaurant and Lodging Association, said in a prepared statement Thursday night. “We are disappointed with Governor DeSantis’ veto but will continue with our efforts to work toward a resolution and ensure equity across Florida’s lodging industry — from vacation rentals to hotels — to best serve our guests and promote their safety.”

    But speaking to the News Service in March, Dennington called short-term rentals “an existential threat” to single-family zoning.

    “Because having a mini-motel pretending like it’s single-family zoning right in the heart of every single-family-zoned street is not single-family zoning. … It’s a commercial enterprise. Period,” she said.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Dara Kam, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • DeSantis calls U.S. surgeon general’s advisory on gun violence an ‘unconstitutional power-grab’

    DeSantis calls U.S. surgeon general’s advisory on gun violence an ‘unconstitutional power-grab’

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Image via Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    Gov. Ron DeSantis is once again declaring that Florida won’t go along with a directive from the Biden administration, this time in regard to the advisory on gun violence announced this week by U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy.

    Murthy, the nation’s top doctor, declared gun violence a public health crisis on Tuesday and released a 39-page report called “Firearm Violence: A Public Health Crisis in America.” In it, he reports how gun-related injuries have become the leading cause of death for children and adolescents since 2020, surpassing motor vehicle crashes, cancer, drug overdoses, and poisoning.

    Murthy’s advisory lists specific policy changes, including some that would require congressional approval. But it was met with a resounding No by DeSantis.

    “During COVID, unelected bureaucrats used ‘public health’ as a pretext to deprive citizens of their rights — and I signed legislation to protect Floridians from government overreach,” the governor posted on X on Wednesday afternoon. “Now, Biden’s Surgeon General is attempting to violate the Second Amendment through the ‘public health’ bureaucracy. “

    “We will not comply,” DeSantis added. “Florida will always reject the Biden Administration’s unconstitutional power-grabs.”

    Among the policy changes Murthy listed are universal background checks, expanding purchaser licensing laws, banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines for civilian use, and creating safer conditions in public places related to firearm use and carry.

    In 2022, 48,204 people in the United States died from firearm-related injuries, including suicides, homicides, and unintentional deaths. That’s 8,000 more lost lives than in 2019 and more than 16,000 more lives lost since 2010, according to reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Second Amendment advocates consider Desantis’ record on guns as mixed. While they applaud his signing legislation last year to allow Floridians to carry concealed weapons without a government-issued permit, they remain unhappy that he has not pushed for the Legislature to pass an “open carry” law, despite publicly saying that he supported it.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: [email protected]. Follow Florida Phoenix on Facebook and Twitter.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Mitch Perry, Florida Phoenix

    Source link

  • Florida Supreme Court sides with DeSantis over ‘anti-riot’ law cracking down on protesters

    Florida Supreme Court sides with DeSantis over ‘anti-riot’ law cracking down on protesters

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Rejecting arguments that the law is ambiguous, the Florida Supreme Court said Thursday that peaceful protesters are not threatened by a measure that Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Legislature passed in 2021 to crack down on violent demonstrations.

    DeSantis championed the law after nationwide protests following the 2020 death of George Floyd, a Black man who was killed by a Minneapolis police officer. But civil-rights groups filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the measure, contending it could lead to peaceful protesters facing charges when demonstrations turn violent.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in 2021 issued a preliminary injunction against the law, describing it as unconstitutionally “vague and overbroad.”

    The state appealed, but the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took a somewhat-unusual step of requesting help from the Florida Supreme Court with what it called a “novel” issue — how to determine the meaning of the word “riot” in the law.

    Thursday’s main opinion disputed Walker’s conclusion that the law was ambiguous. It also agreed with DeSantis and the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office, another defendant in the lawsuit, that a “peaceful protester, under the most natural reading of the statute, is no rioter.”

    “At bottom, the question is whether that law applies to a person who is present at a violent protest, but neither engages in, nor intends to assist others in engaging in, violent and disorderly conduct. And the answer is: no, it does not,” said the 28-page main opinion, written by Justice John Couriel and joined by Chief Justice Carlos Muniz and Justices Charles Canady, Jamie Grosshans, Renatha Francis and Meredith Sasso.

    The law says that a “person commits a riot if he or she willfully participates in a violent public disturbance involving an assembly of three or more persons, acting with a common intent to assist each other in violent and disorderly conduct” that results in an injury to another person, property damage or “imminent danger” of injury or property damage.

    Justice Jorge Labarga wrote a concurring opinion Thursday that agreed with the result of the main opinion — though he said he thought the law was ambiguous.

    “For purposes of (the law), a narrow interpretation of ‘violent public disturbance’ is essential to ensure that prosecutions involving violations of the statute do not capture the peaceful, nonviolent exercise of First Amendment rights nor criminalize the mere presence at or lawful participation in an otherwise peaceful assembly or protest,” Labarga wrote.

    The Supreme Court ruling will go to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which will use it in determining whether to overturn Walker’s preliminary injunction. The challenge to the law was filed by groups such as the Dream Defenders and the Florida State Conference of the NAACP.

    In his 90-page decision, Walker pointed to concerns about vagueness of the law, which includes felony penalties.

    “Though plaintiffs claim that they and their members fear that it (the law) will be used against them based on the color of their skin or the messages that they express, its vagueness permits those in power to weaponize its enforcement against any group who wishes to express any message that the government disapproves of,” Walker wrote. “Thus, while there may be some Floridians who welcome the chilling effect that this law has on the plaintiffs in this case, depending on who is in power, next time it could be their ox being gored.”

    In Thursday’s main opinion, however, Couriel reviewed the history of Florida’s anti-riot laws and analyzed the grammar of the 2021 measure. He wrote that to get a conviction, prosecutors “must prove a defendant acted with intent to assist others in violent and disorderly conduct. This reading of the statute accords with the historical understanding of riot as a crime of violence … and indeed, with common sense.”

    While attorneys for the civil-rights groups have argued the law violates First Amendment rights, they also asked the Supreme Court to narrowly interpret it to ensure peaceful protesters would not be affected.

    “Although (as the district court held) the statute’s plain text is most naturally read to encompass non-violent protected speech, it is also fairly possible to construe the text narrowly to maintain the pre-existing common-law definition and avoid encroaching upon constitutionally protected expression,” the groups’ attorneys wrote in a brief last year.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Floridians Worried About Governor Leaking Health Info

    Floridians Worried About Governor Leaking Health Info

    [ad_1]

    In a shocking surprise…medical marijuana patients, including veterans, may have had their information leaked thanks to the Governor.

    Florida voters have overwhelmingly approved of marijuana use in the sunshine state.  In the first election for medical marijuana, over 60% of citizens voted yes. Governor DeSantis said too bad. In the second vote, the approve vote was 71% and the Governor said the public didn’t understand and he slow rolled it out. Now he is working on trying to block a third vote for recreational. But the latest action has left citizens stunned, now Floridans worried about governor leaking health info for an email campaign.

    RELATED: Study Reinforces Marijuana’s Power To Treat PTSD

    Science, the American Medical Association and the federal Health and Human Services department all agree cannabis can benefit patients with a variety of ailments. Medical marijuana is recognized as a treatment for  PTSD, chronic pain, cancer and more. More research will unlock additional information about the plant, but it is a good start and is one of the basis for rescheduling. HIPAA is law passed in 1996 aimed to alter the transfer of healthcare information, stipulated the guidelines by which personally identifiable information maintained by the healthcare and healthcare insurance industries should be protected from fraud and theft.  Somewhere it slipped in Florida.

    Photo by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images

    Florida’s Department of Health recently emailed nearly 700,000 medical marijuana patients, praising Republican Governor Ron DeSantis. The email promoted achievements of the governor and how it helps them. This is despite is overwhelming opposition not to just  recreational cannabis use and legalization, but also the original law which allowed them be prescribed medical marijuana.

    The email also praised a cancer research program promoted by first lady Casey DeSantis, listed health issues like HIV, hepatitis and syphilis that are in the spending plan and gave a message from Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo that he and DeSantis are “advancing public health and personal responsibility in Florida.”

    RELATED: California or New York, Which Has The Biggest Marijuana Mess

    Medical marijuana patients and advocates say the DeSantis administration violated their privacy by using the patient list to promote policy.

    “That is revolting. That is really such a misuse of power and information,” said state Rep. Kelly Skidmore, the ranking Democrat on the House Health Policy Committee.

    The Department of Health said it didn’t single out medical marijuana patients, but rather sent the budget statement to everyone in its email databases apparently to promote the Governor and First Lady.

    [ad_2]

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear Florida sports betting case

    U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear Florida sports betting case

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Seminole Hardrock Hotel & Casino, Tampa/Facebook

    In a major win for the Seminole Tribe, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to upend a 30-year, multibillion-dollar deal giving the tribe control of sports betting throughout Florida.

    The Supreme Court declined to take up a challenge filed by two pari-mutuel companies. The order, as is typical, did not explain the justices’ reasons, but it said Justice Brett Kavanaugh supported taking up the case. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself.

    The decision keeps in the Seminoles’ hands control of online sports betting, which was included in a 2021 deal signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis and Seminole Tribe of Florida Chairman Marcellus Osceola Jr. and approved by the Legislature.

    A spokesman for the Seminoles said the tribe “applauds” the Supreme Court decision. The gambling deal, known as a compact, could reap Florida at least $2.5 billion over the first five years — and billions of dollars in the future.

    “It means members of the Seminole Tribe and all Floridians can count on a bright future made possible by the compact,” spokesman Gary Bitner said in an email.

    The Supreme Court decision could cement the tribe’s control of sports betting indefinitely, according to experts.

    “For the foreseeable future, the status quo will remain in place, for at least several years, if not 30,” Daniel Wallach, an attorney who specializes in online gambling, told The News Service of Florida.

    The case was focused on a “hub-and-spoke” system in the deal allowing the Seminoles to accept bets anywhere in the state, with the wagers run through servers on tribal land. The deal said bets “using a mobile app or other electronic device shall be deemed to be exclusively conducted by the tribe.”

    U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, whose agency oversees tribal gambling, allowed the deal to go into effect.

    Lawyers for the pari-mutuel companies West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Myers Corp. filed a federal lawsuit challenging her decision, arguing that the compact violates a federal law known as the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, or IGRA, because it authorizes gambling off tribal lands.

    A federal district judge agreed with the pari-mutuel companies in 2021, but a three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in June reversed her ruling. The companies in February filed a petition seeking review at the Supreme Court after the full appellate court refused to reconsider the panel’s decision.

    West Flagler holds three jai alai licenses and Bonita-Fort Myers Corp. does business as Bonita Springs Poker Room in Southwest Florida. The companies alleged the Seminoles’ sports-betting operations will hurt their revenue. Representatives of the companies did not comment when asked Monday.

    Under the three-decade compact, the Seminoles agreed to pay Florida about $20 billion, including $2.5 billion over the first five years.

    The deal also authorized the Seminoles to offer craps and roulette at their casinos and to add three casinos on tribal property in Broward County. It also allowed pari-mutuels to contract with the Seminoles and share revenue from sports betting.

    The tribe in November rolled out a sports-betting app and in December launched craps and roulette at its casinos.

    The Seminoles began making payments to the state in January and have paid more than $357 million under the revenue-sharing agreement, including a payment made Monday, according to Bitner.

    As the federal lawsuit wound its way through the courts, the companies and an owner, Isadore Havenick, asked the Florida Supreme Court to rule on whether the sports-betting arrangement violated part of the state Constitution requiring voter approval of gambling expansions.

    In March, justices unanimously ruled that the companies could not make their case directly to the Florida Supreme Court.

    The decision did not address the merits of the lawsuit, but it turned down the companies’ petition for what is known as a “writ of quo warranto,” which means “by what authority” in Latin.

    In the 11-page opinion, Justice Meredith Sasso cited a 1920 ruling that said quo warranto has been used to “test the right of a person to hold an office of franchise or exercise some right or privilege the peculiar powers of which are derived from the state.”

    “But quo warranto is not and has never been, the proper vehicle to obtain a declaration as to the substantive constitutionality of an enacted law. For that reason, we deny the petition because the relief that petitioners seek is beyond what the writ of quo warranto provides,” Sasso wrote.

    If they decide to continue fighting the sports-betting deal, the pari-mutuels could file a state challenge in circuit court. Also, they still could have other federal legal avenues, Wallach said.

    The companies could challenge the compact on federal equal-protection grounds, according to Wallach. The companies also could challenge a rule adopted by the U.S. Department of the Interior earlier this year that allows states to enter compacts similar to Florida’s with Indian tribes.

    Meanwhile, Wallach predicted the U.S. Supreme Court’s order Monday “will have repercussions that go beyond online sports” and could pave the way for a massive expansion of online betting.

    “It will accelerate Florida’s path to online casino gaming, using the same compact language and potentially as early as next year or 2026,” Wallach said. “Within Florida, this seemingly removes a sizable barrier to i-gaming under Seminole Tribe control.”

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Dara Kam, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Federal appeals court hears arguments about Florida’s ‘Stop WOKE Act’

    Federal appeals court hears arguments about Florida’s ‘Stop WOKE Act’

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Gov. Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    Grappling with issues of government power and academic freedom, a federal appeals court Friday heard arguments in a battle about a 2022 Florida law that restricts how race-related concepts can be taught in state universities — a law that Gov. Ron DeSantis dubbed the “Stop WOKE Act.”

    The state appealed after Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in November 2022 issued a preliminary injunction against the law, which he said violated First Amendment rights.

    Charles Cooper, an attorney for the state, told a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals during Friday’s hearing that the state has the authority to make choices about the content of university courses. He argued that legal precedents back upholding the constitutionality of the law.

    “The cases are legion that the government gets to have a viewpoint,” Cooper said.

    But Leah Watson, an attorney for university instructors who challenged the law, disputed Cooper’s arguments and said the purpose of the law “is only to suppress disfavored views.” She pointed to academic freedom and said universities, not the Legislature, should enforce standards.

    “Classroom instruction is not government speech,” said Watson, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program.

    Rulings in such cases typically take months.

    DeSantis made a priority of the law, which he called the “Stop Wrongs To Our Kids and Employees Act,” or “Stop WOKE Act.” In recent years, he has frequently criticized what he calls “indoctrination” in education and has helped engineer an overhaul of New College of Florida — part of the state university system — to try to make it more conservative.

    The law lists a series of race-related concepts and says it would constitute discrimination if students are subjected to instruction that “espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates or compels” them to believe the concepts.

    As an example, the law labels instruction discriminatory if students are led to believe that they bear “responsibility for, or should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of, actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin or sex.”

    As another example, the law seeks to prohibit instruction that would cause students to “feel guilt, anguish or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the person played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin or sex.”

    But in issuing the preliminary injunction, Walker, who was nominated to bench by former President Barack Obama, called the law “positively dystopian” and said it is “antithetical to academic freedom and has cast a leaden pall of orthodoxy over Florida’s state universities.”

    Walker also separately issued a preliminary injunction against part of the law that placed restrictions on addressing race-related issues in workplace training. A panel of the appeals court in March upheld that injunction.

    But a key issue in Friday’s hearing centered on how much authority the Legislature has to decide what is said in state classrooms. Judge Barbara Lagoa, for example, said a university is an “inherently state institution” and said the issue involves speech of state employees.

    Judge Charles Wilson, meanwhile, seemed skeptical of the state’s arguments, including citing what he described as an “academic freedom exception” to government speech restrictions.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Florida Gov. DeSantis signs $116.5 billion state budget, vetoes nearly $1 billion

    Florida Gov. DeSantis signs $116.5 billion state budget, vetoes nearly $1 billion

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis visited Tampa on Wednesday to sign a $116.5 billion state budget (HB 5001) for fiscal year 2024- 25, boasting about providing “historic support” for education, transportation, conservation, and the environment, plus tax relief, while also taking credit for spending slightly fewer state funds than a year before.

    “Aren’t you happy to see that?” he said to applause from the invited crowd at the Vault in downtown Tampa.

    DeSantis said that he had told House Speaker Paul Renner that “I want to hold the line,” and said that he had close to $1 billion in line-item vetoes. “Some of the stuff wasn’t appropriate for state tax dollars,” he said,

    The fiscal year opens in July 1. For a review of the budget highlights, click here.

    Joined by Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Shawn Hamilton, Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr., and Transportation Secretary Jared Perdue, DeSantis spent approximately an hour reciting the amounts his administration was allocating for various departments.

    On education, the budget includes $28.4 billion in K-12 school spending, an increase of $1.8 billion from a year ago. That includes $1.25 billion directly for teacher salaries, a $200 million increase from a year ago. DeSantis then spent several minutes blasting the teacher unions regarding that funding.

    “It’s not enough to say, ‘Oh, we’re giving money to education, because what happens is, the districts and unfortunately these unions can haggle over this, and they basically try to benefit themselves. So, you can increase funding for education, and unless you mandate that some of that goes to teachers, some of it doesn’t even go to teachers. Sometimes they never do anything for teachers, so this has to go. That’s the only thing they can do.”

    In a press release, Florida Education Association President Andrew Spar said that this “$200 million equates to a salary increase in every classroom teacher’s paycheck of about $125 a month, and nowhere near the $15,000 annual increase needed to match the national average for teacher salaries. The only thing the budget guarantees is that Florida’s teachers will remain near the bottom in average pay.”

    DeSantis mentioned legislation he signed in 2023 that prevents union dues from being deducted from teachers’ paychecks.

    “You don’t have to write a check to a school union if they’re not serving your interest, and I would note that there were school unions in this state when last year’s categorical came out of a billion dollars, that money was there. Teachers were going to get more money,” he said.

    “They were withholding that in negotiations to try to use that for leverage for other parts of their agenda. I tell ya, if you’re looking out for the best interests of the teachers, you would have gotten that money in their pocket by July 1, as soon as it became available. That’s not what some of them chose to do.”

    The governor also boasted that there are no tuition increases for Florida universities, nor has there ever been since he’s been in office.

    The budget has $173.5 million for Florida’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

    Water

    There was $1.7 billion allocated towards water quality and $740 million for Everglades restoration.

    “Gov. DeSantis has continued to fulfill the promises that he made to Floridians by advocating for and securing a budget that contains over $740 million for Everglades restoration, as well as funding for resiliency and statewide environmental efforts,” said Everglades Trust CEO Anna Upton in a press release.

    “It’s been clear from the beginning that he understands the importance of the Everglades — to our economy and environment — and has continually sought to push restoration forward,” Upton said.

    The budget also allocates $456.5 million to support the health and development of pregnant women, new moms, and children. There is $442 million to support behavioral health sciences.

    Regarding the Corrections Department, which has major funding problems, the governor’s budget includes more than $102 million for infrastructure needs: $42.3 million for general maintenance and repair at facilities across the state; $3 million to address environmental needs; $56.4 million for new and secure open bay dorms, and $750,000 for repairs related to ADA compliance.

    Late in the afternoon, the governor’s office released its list of vetoes, which you can see here.

    Among those vetoes was $32 million for Florida’s Cultural and Museum Grants and Cultural Facilities Grants. Orlando area Democratic House Rep. Anna Eskamani responded in a statement about that specific veto.

    “These funds were set to support well-vetted nonprofit organizations that play a crucial role in enriching our community and preserving our cultural heritage,” she said.

    “Investing in arts and culture is a powerful economic generator. The arts sector creates jobs, stimulates tourism, and enhances the quality of life for all Floridians. Cutting this funding undermines the economic vitality of our state and disregards the significant contributions of our cultural institutions. We must recognize and support the invaluable impact of arts and culture on our economy and our society. I urge the Legislature to fully fund these programs next session and ask that community members step up to fill these funding gaps created by Gov. DeSantis.”

    The Florida Democratic Party also released a statement after the veto list was published.

    “Once again, Ron has passed a near-record budget that doesn’t come close to meeting the needs of Floridians,” said FDP Chair Nikki Fried. “Among other things, this year’s veto list includes millions of dollars in canceled stormwater projects, school safety improvements, and local infrastructure fixes — things that actually improve our day-to-day lives.

    Fried continued: “Adding insult to injury, Ron waited until late in the day to release the details of his vetoes in a blatant attempt to keep the press from reporting on them today. As always, Florida Democrats will work to hold him accountable for the harm he does to local communities in the name of a false fiscal conservatism.”

    This story has been updated to reflect release of the governor’s veto list.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: [email protected]. Follow Florida Phoenix on Facebook and Twitter.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Mitch Perry, Florida Phoenix

    Source link

  • Federal judge rejects Florida Gov. DeSantis lawsuit on children’s health insurance

    Federal judge rejects Florida Gov. DeSantis lawsuit on children’s health insurance

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    A U.S. district judge Friday rejected a lawsuit filed by Florida challenging new federal guidelines in a program that provides subsidized health insurance to children.

    Tampa-based Judge William Jung issued a 16-page ruling that said federal law required Florida to go through an administrative process to challenge the guidelines. After that process, the state could take the issue to a federal appeals court.

    Jung denied a request by Florida for a preliminary injunction and dismissed the lawsuit against the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    The dispute involves the federal Children’s Health Insurance Program, which operates in Florida as KidCare. The program provides low-cost health insurance to children whose families make too much money to qualify for Medicaid. In Florida, that has meant families have paid $15 or $20 a month for coverage.

    Florida filed the lawsuit in February, challenging new guidelines that would prevent states from cutting off coverage for non-payment of premiums after children have been found eligible for the program. Eligibility is determined each year, so the state contends the guidelines could lead to coverage being provided for months without premiums being paid.

    With KidCare financed by the state, the federal government and premiums, the lawsuit said family payments play an important role in “maintaining the long-term stability” of the program.

    But Jung, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Donald Trump, said Florida needed to pursue an administrative challenge at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, rather than filing the lawsuit in district court. The federal agency issued the guidelines in fall 2023 through what is described in Jung’s ruling as a “frequently asked questions” or FAQ document.

    “CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) released the FAQs and requested amended CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) plans from states that treated nonpayment of premiums as an exception to continuous eligibility,” Jung wrote. “Rather than submitting an amended plan or risking an adverse determination, Florida filed this action in federal court seeking a preliminary injunction. This Florida cannot do.”

    Florida contends that federal officials violated a law known as the Administrative Procedure Act. But Jung wrote that it “is undisputed that any analysis of Florida’s APA (Administrative Procedure Act) claims will largely turn on properly interpreting the Medicaid and CHIP statutes. Interpretation of these statutes falls squarely within CMS’ realm of expertise, especially considering Medicaid and CHIP’s recognized complexities.”

    U.S. Department of Justice attorneys have argued that the guidelines properly carry out a federal law known as the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which made changes to the Children’s Health Insurance Program. In a February court filing, Justice Department attorneys said the law required the children’s program to match a “continuous eligibility requirement” in Medicaid that does not allow dropping coverage for non-payment of premiums.

    “These changes were intended to reduce ‘churn’—cycles of termination and re-enrollment that increase administrative costs and cause coverage lapses for vulnerable children,” the document said.

    Florida’s children’s health program dates to the 1990s, with subsidized insurance available to families with incomes up to 210 percent of the federal poverty level. As an example, a family of four at 200 percent of the poverty level this year would have income of $62,400, according to federal calculations.

    The Legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis last year approved a bill that would expand eligibility in the subsidized health program to 300 percent of the poverty level with higher premiums than have been charged in the past. The expansion requires federal approval, and court documents said the state would have to comply with the new guidelines to get approval.

    “CMS indicated that it would not approve Florida’s proposed expansion without accompanying modifications to Florida CHIP’s continuous eligibility provisions, namely, the provisions that allow the state to disenroll an eligible child for nonpayment of premiums during the continuous eligibility period,” the lawsuit said.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Teachers union criticizes Florida for keeping history standard touting ‘benefits’ of slavery

    Teachers union criticizes Florida for keeping history standard touting ‘benefits’ of slavery

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Gov. Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    The leader of the Florida Education Association teachers union on Wednesday criticized the State Board of Education for not reversing course on a controversial history standard approved last year.

    The board, meeting in Miami, signed off on some changes to social-studies standards for public schools. But the changes did not revise a sixth-grade African American history standard that drew backlash because of a slavery-related issue when it was approved last summer.

    The backlash centered on a standard that says, “Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.” FEA President Andrew Spar on Wednesday criticized the standard remaining part of the larger instructional guidelines.

    “That is a concern, as well as making sure that our students have a complete and honest history around both the African American experience and all experiences in our country,” Spar said.

    He urged members of the board to talk with teachers across the state about the standards. Board Vice Chairman Ryan Petty argued that rules and standards approved by the board are crafted with input from educators.

    “The notion that we’re not out engaged with educators and engaged with teachers in developing these rules is a false notion,” Petty said.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Voter outreach groups targeted by new laws in several GOP-led states are struggling to do their work

    Voter outreach groups targeted by new laws in several GOP-led states are struggling to do their work

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON – During the presidential election four years ago, the Equal Ground Education Fund hired over 100 people to go door-to-door and attend festivals, college homecomings and other events to help register voters across Florida. Their efforts for this year’s elections look much different.

    A state law passed last year forced them to stop in-person voter registration, cut staff and led to a significant drop in funding. Organizers aren’t sure how robust their operations will be in the fall.

    Genesis Robinson, the group’s interim executive director, said the law has had a “tremendous impact” on its ability to host events and get into communities to engage directly with potential voters.

    “Prior to all of these changes, we were able to operate in a space where we were taking action and prepare our communities and make sure they were registered to vote — and help if they weren’t,” he said.

    Florida is one of several states, including Kansas, Missouri and Texas, where Republicans have enacted voting restrictions since 2021 that created or enhanced criminal penalties and fines for those who assist voters. The laws have forced some voter outreach groups to cease operations, while others have greatly altered or reduced their activities.

    The Florida law, signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis last May, imposed a $50,000 fine on third-party voter registration organizations if the staff or volunteers who handle or collect the forms have been convicted of a felony or are not U.S. citizens. It also raised the fines the groups could face, from $1,000 to $250,000, and reduced the amount of time they are able to return registration applications from 14 days to 10 days.

    A federal judge blocked portions of the law earlier this month, including the one targeting felons and those who are not citizens. Even so, the law had a direct effect on the operations of Equal Ground and other voter advocacy organizations in the state before the ruling.

    The League of Women Voters in Florida, one of the plaintiffs, shifted away from in-person voter registration to digital outreach. Cecile Scoon, the league’s co-president, said the law stripped the personal connection between its workers and communities. Digital tools aren’t easy to use when registering voters and can be expensive, she said.

    These organizations are needed because local election officials don’t always provide adequate support and information, said Derby Johnson, a voter in Ormond Beach who attended a recent community event in Daytona Beach organized by Equal Ground. He said it appeared the Florida Legislature was just trying to make it harder for certain communities to register and cast ballots.

    “There are parties actively working to suppress the vote, particularly in Black and brown communities, and these groups help educate and register voters to mitigate that,” she said.

    MOVE Texas, a voting rights group that focuses on voters who are 30 or younger, adjusted to that state’s 2021 election overhaul with additional training for their staff and volunteers. Among the provisions drawing concern was one that increased criminal penalties for anyone who receives compensation for assisting a voter, which especially affected the ability to recruit high school and college students for voter registration drives.

    “The law contributed to this culture of fear in our elections and being a person who registers voters,” said Stephanie Gomez, the group’s political director.

    Republicans in Kansas overrode a veto by Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly to pass a bill that made it a felony if anyone registering voters impersonated or was assumed to impersonate an election official.

    That forced Loud Light Kansas, a voter outreach group that focuses on minority communities, to stop its registration efforts. Would-be voters typically perceived their staff and volunteers as election workers even when told otherwise, said Anita Alexander, the organization’s vice president.

    “We’re trying to engage impacted people, but we weren’t willing to risk anyone getting charged by doing voter engagement work,” she said.

    Loud Light and other local voter registration groups sued the Legislature. The Democratic governor said there has been no evidence in the state of widespread voter fraud or instances of individuals impersonating election officials.

    In Missouri, the state chapter of the League of Women Voters and the Missouri State Conference of the NAACP sued after the state enacted wide-ranging election legislation in 2022.

    Among other things, the new law bans compensation for those who register voters and requires that anyone who helps more than 10 people register must also register with the secretary of state’s office and be a voter themselves. Violators can face criminal penalties.

    The completed secretary of state’s forms are public, which presents a privacy concern for many people who might otherwise want to help with voter registration efforts, said Denise Lieberman, director and general counsel of the Missouri Voter Protection Coalition.

    “Historically, when those membership lists have been obtained, they’ve been used to intimidate. So, there’s a lot of trepidation, especially in groups that are targeting low-income or communities of color,” she said. “If you just want to volunteer for one hour on a Saturday morning to help out on your college campus or on an Earth Day or anything, you have to go through this whole process.”

    The Missouri law is on hold while the legal challenge plays out, with a trial set for August.

    Voting rights experts expect to see continued attempts to restrict voting and the activities of voter outreach groups in Republican-controlled states, said Megan Bellamy, vice president of law and policy at the Voting Rights Lab.

    “The effort to target third-party voter registration groups is just, unfortunately, one of many policy areas that state legislatures are moving to address,” she said.

    ___

    The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    Ayanna Alexander, Associated Press

    Source link