The right to vote cannot depend on how much money you have. That’s what a federal court ruled in October, when it blocked Florida’s attempt to force returning citizens — people with felony convictions who have completed incarceration, probation, and parole — to pay for their basic right to vote. Florida voters have made clear that they want returning citizens to rejoin the franchise, but as we approach the 2020 primaries, politicians are scrambling to stifle the voices of these newly eligible voters. We’re going back to court to defend their rights at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals next week.

In 2018, Floridians resoundingly voted to pass Amendment 4, an amendment to the state Constitution ending permanent disenfranchisement of people with felony convictions. The law affected more than a million returning citizens. Amendment 4 is historic not only for Florida but the whole nation — it’s the single largest expansion of voting rights in the United States since the 26th Amendment lowered the voting age to 18. And it had a profound racial justice impact. Before Amendment 4’s passage, more than 20 percent of the Black voting-age population in Florida was disenfranchised due to a felony conviction.

“The passage of Amendment 4 allowed me to register to vote. That was one of the happiest days of my life. I joined the litigation to fight for my right to vote and to have a voice for the 1.4 million Floridians that are also affected by this law.” —Betty Riddle, plaintiff

That progress is now on the line. In June, Governor Ron DeSantis put hundreds of thousands of newly eligible voters in danger of being permanently disenfranchised yet again when he signed Senate Bill 7066. Under SB7066, returning citizens must pay the exorbitant court costs, fines, and fees levied against them at the time of their conviction, or lose their right to vote. This is clearly unconstitutional — Florida cannot restore voting rights to people wealthy enough to pay off their fines and fees but deny them for people unable to pay those obligations.

The ink hadn’t yet dried on SB7066 when we filed our lawsuit challenging it with partners at the ACLU of Florida, the Brennan Center, and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. When we won a preliminary injunction in October, a federal judge declared that “the State of Florida … cannot deny restoration of a [returning citizen’s] right to vote solely because the [returning citizen] does not have the financial resources necessary to pay” their legal financial obligations. On the same day of our victory, Governor DeSantis signaled his agreement with the decision; his spokesperson told the media that the Governor “recogniz[es] the need to provide an avenue for individuals to pay back their debts as a result of true financial hardship.”

The governor’s actions, however, tell an entirely different story. Since our preliminary injunction victory, the state has refused to provide any guidance to voters or local supervisors of elections, or develop a system for people unable to pay their fines and fees. After 40 days of dragging their feet, DeSantis and the Florida Department of State filed an appeal in the Eleventh Circuit.

Governor DeSantis is trying to run out the clock before the March 2020 primary, and is deliberately sowing confusion to dissuade eligible voters from registering and going to the polls. Florida is leaving its citizens on their own to figure out what fines and fees they owe and whether they are eligible to vote. With radio silence from the state, it’s likely that many will refrain from voting out of fear of prosecution. Chilling the participation of these new voters is the whole point of these efforts. 

“I’ve never known a life where I didn’t have barriers and voting is the first step to being able to remove those barriers.” —Marq Mitchell, plaintiff

We will continue fighting in federal court for our clients and the hundreds of thousands of Floridians' voting rights that SB7066 seeks to unconstitutionally and permanently eliminate. While the Florida Supreme Court recently issued an advisory opinion determining that fines and fees are part of a “sentence” under Amendment 4, this does nothing to change the preliminary injunction issued in our case or what the Constitution requires. It is instead Florida’s Legislature that can fix SB7066 by removing the fines and fees requirement for people who can’t afford to pay. 

Plenty of states have already set positive examples on restoring the right to vote. Many states have loosened disenfranchisement laws in recent years, with some dropping them altogether. Florida used to be one of the strictest states on felony disenfranchisement, but by passing Amendment 4 in the first place, Floridians demonstrated their commitment to ensuring that all citizens have an opportunity to vote. Change is possible and the people — not the politicians — are the ones leading the charge. 

Voting is a basic right of citizenship. Losing this right is one of the many unjust consequences of a felony conviction, hindering returning citizens’ ability to fully participate in our democracy after they complete their sentences. The right to vote should never come with a price tag — and Florida cannot violate constitutional protections in order to keep people from the polls. We are confident the Eleventh Circuit will agree.

Orion Danjuma, Staff Attorney, ACLU Racial Justice Program,
Jonathan Topaz, Skadden Fellow, ACLU Voting Rights Project,
& Leila Rafei, Content Strategist, ACLU

Today we commemorate the 47^th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case that recognized a constitutional right to abortion. In the nearly five decades since, the decision has weathered numerous storms and faced plenty of erosion, leaving too many without meaningful access to abortion care. But 2020 could be its most consequential year yet.

This spring, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in June Medical Services v. Gee and could uphold state abortion restrictions identical to ones it struck down only four years ago, thereby allowing states to continue shutting down abortion clinics with no medical justification. Unsatisfied, 207 abortion opponents in Congress have asked the Court to overturn Roe entirely and pave the way for states to ban abortion outright.

But while this high-stakes showdown plays out at the Supreme Court, we cannot take our eyes off of the states. In 2019, seven states throughout the South and Midwest tried to ban abortion (all have been blocked thus far) while seven other states passed eight affirmative measures to protect and expand access to abortion. This year will include new threats, as well as new opportunities to build on recent victories.

The attacks on abortion are mounting quickly. Already in 2020, bills that would ban abortion from the earliest days of pregnancy — like those passed in Georgia and Alabama last year — have been introduced in 13 states, with more likely to be filed in the coming days and weeks. Not all will advance, but there is a genuine risk that at least five more abortion bans could be enacted this year.

Less aggressive but equally harmful and extreme measures are also being considered: a Florida bill that would force young people to obtain parental consent for an abortion, which would increase risks to vulnerable youth; bans on the standard of care for abortion after 14 weeks in Michigan and Nebraska; and an Ohio measure that promotes the dangerous and unproven theory that an abortion with pills can be “reversed.” Additionally, abortion opponents are taking steps to eliminate abortion protections or pass new restrictions via ballot measures in Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and elsewhere. 

But it’s not all bad news. Many states are fighting to protect and expand reproductive rights. Inspired by the bold actions of Illinois, Maine, New York, and others, more states are gearing up to ensure access to abortion no matter what happens at the Supreme Court.

Massachusetts is working to pass the ROE Act, which would, among other things, improve youth access to abortion and ensure coverage for abortion regardless of income or immigration status. In the wake of an historic election in Virginia, legislators are lining up to show their support with a bevy of proactive bills. And New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy recently called for efforts to codify reproductive rights in state law.

The reality is, however, that we will never break free from the relentless cycle of harmful state laws and court battles without federal action by Congress — which is why we are joining calls for Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act. Already supported by more than 200 co-sponsors in the House and 42 in the Senate, WHPA would prohibit states from shutting down abortion clinics and banning abortion outright. A nationwide safeguard against the breathtaking scope of medically-unnecessary abortion restrictions states have passed to delay and obstruct access to care would be a critical step toward making the right to abortion a reality for all people, no matter where they live. 

But it’s not enough to keep clinic doors open. We must also ensure that people can afford to access the care they need by working to eliminate coverage bans like the Hyde Amendment that for far too long have pushed care out of reach for low-income people.

Recent polling shows that a majority of voters support coverage for abortion for people enrolled in Medicaid — and support is steadily building in Congress for the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH Woman) Act, a bill to end restrictions on abortion coverage in government insurance programs and stop political interference with private insurance coverage of abortion. Presidential candidates have likewise committed to ending the Hyde Amendment in response to sustained pressure from dedicated activists, including ACLU volunteers working through our Rights For All campaign.

The Roe anniversary is an important milestone, but we can’t ignore the fact that continued attacks on abortion rights still leave countless people without adequate protections. Whatever twists and turns we may encounter in the coming year, the ACLU will keep fighting to fulfill Roe’s promise.

Jessica Arons, Senior Advocacy and Policy Counsel for Reproductive Freedom, ACLU

Last night, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) deported an Iranian student with a valid visa, despite a federal court order prohibiting his removal.

Shahab Dehghani arrived at Boston Logan Airport on Sunday, January 19 to study at Northeastern University, where he was enrolled. Customs officials detained him and questioned him for hours, abruptly revoking his student visa, which the State Department granted after a year of intense vetting.

As CBP tried to put Shahab on the next available flight, supporters and friends gathered at night in the arrivals hall at Logan to demand that CBP stop deporting students with valid visas while attorneys filed an emergency lawsuit to halt his removal.

https://twitter.com/ACLU_Mass/statuses/1219417527203368961

Within hours, a federal judge ordered that Shahab’s deportation be delayed for 48 hours, pending a hearing scheduled for the following morning. The crowd’s chants of “Students’ dreams matter!” and “Do the right thing!” dissolved into cheers as we heard the news, and we went home with hope in our hearts that Shahab would receive due process.

Sadly, we were mistaken. We awoke to the news that CBP had deported Shahab, putting him on an Air France flight despite the judge’s order. I wish I could say we were surprised, but we’ve seen this kind of flagrant defiance of the law from immigration officials before. In 2017, CBP sowed chaos by enforcing President Trump’s unlawful Muslim ban, flaunting court orders and deporting travelers at will. Last night, as we waited eagerly for news of Shahab’s fate, I was reminded of the heroic efforts of those ACLU lawyers who worked relentlessly in 2017 to ensure that Muslim travelers could avail of their constitutional rights.

The Trump administration’s recent targeting of Iranians and Iranian Americans is shameful, and CBP must be held accountable for its actions. Shahab is only the most recent victim — according to one report, at least 10 Iranian students with valid visas have been sent back since August 2019, with over seven of those travelling through Boston’s Logan Airport.

When dozens of Iranian Americans were unlawfully detained at a border crossing in Washington state, the ACLU made it clear: Military action abroad does not justify discrimination at home. Iranians and Iranian Americans have rights, and we will not stand by while CBP and other government agencies inflict their arbitrary and cruel policies without the slightest regard for the rule of law.

Students deserve to follow their dreams. Many of the people turned away by our government were admitted to some of the most prestigious higher education institutions in the country. These are some of the best and brightest, and their presence here enriches us all. Even after they’re admitted to schools, Iranian students endure months of intense scrutiny and spend large sums to apply for visas. To upend their lives and their future careers so cruelly at the last minute does more than dehumanize them — it dehumanizes us. It says to the world that we are not a welcoming nation, but a mean and capricious one, and that our laws are nothing but pretexts for wanton discrimination.

Since Shahab has already been removed, a federal judge today ruled the case moot. But, in the United States, nobody is above the law — not even CBP. We will continue to fight in legislatures, in courtrooms, and on the streets to defend against the whims of a racist administration, and to hold CPB and other immigration agencies accountable for their deplorable and illegal behavior.

Carol Rose, Executive Director, ACLU of Massachusetts