Comments on: Telling Your Story: Voting Arrestee Speaks Out

By: R.R.

R.R. — Tue, 16 May 2023 00:48:12 +0000

In reply to R.R.. If you had only one felony case in Fl with “adjudication withheld” and no other felony case in other states then your civil rights were never removed. But again, things change fast. Contact a Florida lawyer that’s knows the subject.

By: R.R.

R.R. — Mon, 15 May 2023 06:32:49 +0000

As I understand it, if you only had one felony case in Fl or in any other state and you had adjudication withheld in Fl for that case, then you can vote. But things change fast, so better check with lawyer first.

[Moderator’s note: The Florida Constitution states, “no person convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense shall be qualified to vote until restoration of civil rights”].

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 15 May 2023 02:20:16 +0000

Why is this political record of failures in the governance of SO mgmt in FL not used on the nat’l scene on the eve of Gov DeSanto’s campaign for President. Certainly these failures color an otherwise successful record of political achievements, and for me, it puts leadership skills in question.We see this failure in the draconian laws on this minority of citizens; none of these laws are supported as valid by studies and the academia, and no politician or the media are enacting legislation based on this strong evidence.These restrictions degrade and shame citizens after their sentences are served, and show NO proof of making anyone safer. In fact the denial of reentry into communities in terms of housing, jobs, no vote, take away dignity, create isolation, poverty, desperation, dependency, and broken lives.These laws serve to violate the l rights of some citizens to the free pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.Crime would likely be reduced if the policies in effect did not create the homelessness and tent-cities. This is a blight on the ineffectiveness of all those in office. Europeans refuse to submit to the blind US intimidation, when our gov’t chooses to violate its citizen’s. The selection of staff that support such egregious restrictions, does not bode well for the public service of those in office. The mishandling of all citizens seeking shelter in emergency shelters is an abomination. Sheriffs and other officials take an oath that requires them to protect and serve all citizens, and then are given resources and authority to provide reasonable protection at public assembly. Educated servants know that these people being thrown into the wind are not rabid predators. We need leaders with a proven track record to change failure, effect good governance, and improve the lives of all citizens as written by the founding fathers. https://youtu.be/KDeS-TafF50 https://youtu.be/NiuNuHKEF38

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 15 May 2023 01:44:32 +0000

In reply to Tim.

Again, retroactively applying laws as to where I can go and what I can do is taking my freedoms and that is punishment and unconstitutional.
I can sort of see a law that says they are supposed to check people coming in, but how can you retroactively make it illegal for me to be there? That is how it used to be. Then they decided to shift the burden onto me because schools weren’t following the law where they were supposed to check everyone. I have a child. I need to drop them off, meet with their teachers at least once a year, and also be able to see if they are in a safe environment. Those are my rights as a parent. I could also see if they passed these laws as “effective this date, anyone that committed a crime from that point forward cannot…”.
But to take away rights I already had with no new crime is wrong. But it’s what they do.

By: Ed C

Ed C — Sun, 14 May 2023 23:27:45 +0000

In reply to Jacob. A state constitutional amendment cannot conflict with the federal constitution.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sun, 14 May 2023 15:13:23 +0000

In reply to JJJJ. A constitutional amendment is unconstitutional? I don’t know that there’s any precedent for a court ruling to that effect.

By: JJJJ

JJJJ — Sun, 14 May 2023 14:59:31 +0000

Florida Amendment 4 must be ruled unconstitutional (as soon as someone challenges it).
It violates the federal judge’s ruling from 2018 that stated that the (then current) system in place in Florida of a governor’s tribunal as the vehicle for felon – restoration of civil rights as being clearly unconstitutional in the United States of America.
The judge specifically mentioned carveouts (when specifically addressing re-enfranchisement) in his ruling and clearly and vehemently spoke against them.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 14 May 2023 14:44:57 +0000

The referenced article is pay walled. Reason needs to do a parallel piece on this for the rest of us.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 14 May 2023 14:42:19 +0000

In reply to Tim.

Tim it doesn’t look deliberate, it looks like he was just caught up living life and was asked to attend a family member’s event, and he didn’t have his restrictions top of mind mind at the time he went, and it bit him.

For us, it is like having a form of probation that always follows us everywhere we go. If we don’t always think about our status every day, we are bound to eventually slip up like this man and make a mistake. Truthfully, this could be any one of us on a bad day.

I dare any naysayer try to perfectly obey these onerous rules day in and day out FOR DECADES and see if you can do better than this man.

By: rpsabq

rpsabq — Sun, 14 May 2023 04:37:07 +0000

Thank God the Press is still able to see things for what they are.