By Noreen Marcus, FloridaBulldog.org
Sponsors of an abortion-expanding proposal for Florida’s Nov. 5 ballot can’t challenge what they call a “dirty trick” to convince voters it’s too expensive because the sponsors played a supporting role, the Florida Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
Justice Jorge Labarga dissented from the 6-1 opinion written by Chief Justice Carlos Muniz. Labarga warned the decision “opens the door” to legislators wrongly interfering with “a citizen-driven constitutional amendment process.”
The sponsors were placed in “an impossible position,” had no choice but to participate in meetings of the Legislature’s Financial Impact Estimating Conference, and should not be punished for doing so, Labarga argued.
Directed by Florida Senate President Kathleen Passidomo and House Speaker Paul Renner to reconvene and exercise its “discretion,” the conference produced a cautionary fiscal impact statement that will appear on the ballot alongside Amendment 4.
If it’s passed, Amendment 4 will prevent the government from regulating abortion before fetal viability – the Roe v. Wade standard that the U.S. Supreme Court overturned two years ago. Amendment 4 would invalidate Florida’s extreme six-week abortion ban that the Florida Supreme Court approved April 1 in a 6-1 decision, with Labarga dissenting then as well.
The fiscal statement says adopting the amendment would trigger extensive litigation “that will negatively impact the state budget.” Also, increasing abortions “may negatively affect the growth of state and local revenues over time.”
Yet it ends with an admission “the total impact of the proposed amendment is indeterminate.”
COURT SIDES WITH STATE
To help craft what evolved into a bad-for-the-economy narrative, the Legislature brought in Rachel Greszler, a Heritage Foundation researcher who specializes in economic issues including budgeting, spending and debt. Greszler worked on the fiscal panel along with Chris Spencer, executive director of the State Board of Administration and a stand-in for Gov. Ron DeSantis. The foundation is the far-right think tank behind Project 2025, the blueprint for a second Donald Trump administration.
Amendment 4 sponsor Floridians Protecting Freedom (FPF) petitioned the Supreme Court to invalidate the fiscal statement on the basis that it shouldn’t have been written. Their lawyers argued that legislative leaders Passidomo and Renner exceeded their authority and played a dirty trick by ordering the fiscal panel to rewrite an earlier version that a trial judge had rejected.
Instead of waiting for an appeal to play out, the panel quickly rewrote the statement to “mislead” voters into believing that expanding access to abortion would be bad for Florida’s economy, according to FPF.
“What should have been an easy administrative fix on outdated language has become a dirty trick to mislead voters,” Lauren Brenzel, director of the “Yes on 4” campaign, has said. She could not be reached for comment on Wednesday’s ruling.
The court adopted the state of Florida’s position that fiscal conference members rewrote the statement voluntarily – not because Passidomo and Renner told them to – and that FPF representatives expressed their opinions and provided input at public meetings of the conference.
Therefore, they “waived or forfeited their opportunity to seek … relief,” the court decided.
‘A LEGAL QUAGMIRE’
The court expressed no opinion on the merits of the fiscal impact statement. The ruling appears narrow but, according to Labarga, it could have widespread application.
It creates “a legal quagmire,” his dissent says. “This case, involving unique facts, untested legal issues, and a time-sensitive matter of statewide importance, calls for more.”
Passage of Amendment 4 will require a 60 percent majority. The most recent polling indicates it’s falling short.
A poll released Wednesday from Florida Atlantic University and Mainstreet USA found that 56 percent of Florida voters support the ballot proposal, The Hill reported. The poll of 1,055 registered voters was conducted Aug. 10-11 and has an estimated margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
DeSantis has been working hard to defeat the amendment. On Aug. 16 he told a gathering at Jesuit High School in Tampa: “If you care about building a culture of life in this state or this country, them [FPF] winning in Florida, I think, really represents the end of the pro-life movement,” the Tampa Bay Times reported.
Apparently, DeSantis is trying to leverage the fiscal impact statement to scare taxpayers with a warning that passing Amendment 4 would instigate endless taxpayer-funded litigation.
Not surprisingly, the Legislature’s fiscal panel and the Florida Supreme Court have sounded the exact same alarm.
Leave a Reply