A Florida circuit court Judge is giving state economists up to 15 days to come up with a new description for the abortion access amendment that will be on the November ballot.
When voters go to the polls they will see a financial impact statement alongside the citizen initiative that, if approved, would guarantee access to abortion up to the point of viability. The amendment would supersede Florida's current six-week abortion ban.
The group that is sponsoring the amendment — Floridians Protecting Freedom — challenged the wording of the impact statement that had been previously drawn up by members of an impact conference.
That statement was worked on and released months prior to the Florida Supreme Court decision that triggered the current six-week ban. It also mentioned a previous 15-week ban that is no longer in effect and how additional litigation was possible. In the end, economists said that because of several outcomes, they could not determine if the measure would have any impact on state or local revenues.
Judge John C. Cooper, however, concluded on Wednesday that the statement was "inaccurate, ambiguous, misleading, unclear and confusing" and should be redone before it goes on the ballot.
Cooper made it clear he was not directing the impact conference — which is made up of staff from the Legislature and the Governor's Office and the Office of Economic and Demographic Research — about exactly what to say. But Cooper said the statement needed to reflect the current status of abortion laws in Florida.
Cooper added that he thought it was "speculative" to suggest that an amendment would trigger additional lawsuits or that legislators would pass something in response.
"The parameters should be on what the law is now," Cooper told lawyers from the bench.
The ruling by Cooper followed a hearing that lasted several hours. Much of the hearing was not centered on the wording of the impact statement but whether or not Cooper had jurisdiction to hear the case and whether local election supervisors should be part of the litigation. Cooper agreed to dismiss the counts of the lawsuit that were directed at Election Supervisors.
Lawyers representing the Florida Department of State did not argue over the wording of the impact statement, but did question whether the case could be considered by Cooper.
The 15-day timeline for economists to redo the financial impact statement will start once a written order is issued. That will likely occur on Monday, Cooper said. It's not clear if the state will appeal the decision.
Attorney Margaret Good, representing Floridians Protecting Freedom in the lawsuit, issued the following statement in response to today's hearing:
"Judge Cooper found the Financial Impact Statement to be 'inaccurate, ambiguous, misleading, unclear, and confusing.' We agree, which is why we brought this lawsuit: since abortion is now banned at 6 weeks, it presents outdated information about the legality of abortion, it discusses litigation which is no longer relevant and it speculates about future litigation, which is misleading," Good said.
Astonishingly, the defendants themselves — including the FIEC — did not dispute this finding. We are satisfied with today's decision to require the revision of the Financial Impact Statement. Floridians Protecting Freedom worked hard to ensure the amendment language is clear, concise and accurate. We want the state to hold themselves to those same standards. Because it becomes part of the ballot, voters have the right to be provided an accurate financial impact statement."
Attorney Daniel Tilley of ACLU Florida added: "Because the Florida Supreme Court has ruled on the 15-week ban, and the 6-week ban is now in effect, the state's financial impact statement is no longer accurate. This November, Florida voters need to see updated language on their ballot that does not hide the fact that politicians have already made it nearly impossible to obtain an abortion in Florida. We're happy the court agrees."
No comments:
Post a Comment