UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND,)

as an organization; MURAT LIMAGE;

)

PAMELA GOMEZ,

)

)

Plaintiffs.

)

)

v.

)

)

KEN DETZNER, in his official

)

capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

)

)

Defendant.

)

~---------------------------)

CIVIL ACTION FILENO. ----------Three Judge Court Requested

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE PANEL l. This is an action to enforce rights guaranteed to Murat Limage, Pamela Gomez, and Mi Familia Vota Education Fund ("MFVEF") (together with Murat Limage and Pamela Gomez, "Plaintiffs") by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. Defendant Ken Detzner, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State, has failed to obtain Section 5 preclearance before implementing, and causing to be implemented, certain changes in standards, practices, and procedures in Florida affecting voting in the five covered counties. Specifically, Defendant has put new procedures into effect for conducting voter registration list maintenance activities, including but not limited to, matching the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV") database with the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS") database, forwarding a list of "potential non-citizens" to Supervisors of Elections, and requiring Supervisors of Elections to initiate the process of removing registered voters ii-om the voting rolls. The Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief prohibiting the

US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

Defendant from continuing to implement the new voter purge procedures unless and until Section 5 preclearance has been obtained from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney General.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 2. This action challenges the new voter purge procedures being enforced by the Defendant Secretary of State and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 to halt the continued use of the unprecleared voter purge procedures, and to require that Defendant undertake appropriate remedial measures to restore the legally enforceable status quo ante. 3. Under the new voter purge procedures, Defendant claims to have generated a list of thousands of registered voters whose records in the DHSMV database indicate potential noncitizenship status. Without first obtaining the required Section 5 preclearance, Defendant has directed all Florida county Supervisors of Elections to institute voter registration list maintenance activities, including the removal and/or denial of the right to vote to individuals who fail to respond to the required mailings. 4. Defendant is proceeding to implement the new voter purge procedures notwithstanding: 1) widely-reported information showing that the targeting procedure is highly inaccurate; 2) strong opposition from numerous Florida county Supervisors of Elections; and 3) formal notice by the United States Department of Justice that Defendant's implementation of the procedures appear to violate Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. 5. Plaintiffs have no plain, speedy, or adequate remedy at law other than the relief requested in this Complaint. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendant will continue to illegally
2
us_ACT!VE:144 02130917199995. 34 30

enforce the new voter purge procedures against registered voters within the five Florida counties subject to the Section 5 preclearance requirement.
REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE PANEL
6. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973(a), "[a]ny action under this section shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28 of the United States Code and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court." Plaintiffs, by their counsel, therefore, request the Court to notifY the Chief Judge of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that Plaintiffs' claim that Defendants have failed to comply with the preclearance provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is required to be heard by a district court of three judges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284 and 42 U.S.c. § 1973c.
JURISDICTION 7. This civil action is authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1343, see Allen v. State Bd. Elections, 393 U.S. 544 (1969), and by 42 U.S.c. § 1983, to redress the deprivation under color of state statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of rights, privileges, or immunities secured to Plaintiffs by the Constitution and laws of the United States. This action is also authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1973j to secure equitable and other relief under an act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights. 8. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) & (4), and 42 U.S.C. § I973j(f). This Court has jurisdiction to grant both declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §§ 2201 and 2202. 9. Jurisdiction for Plaintiffs' claim for attorneys' fees is based on 42 U.S.c. §§ 19731(e) and 1988. 10. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.c. § 1391(b).
US_ACT1VE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

PARTIES 11. Plaintiff MURAT LIMAGE is a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. Mr. Limage is a citizen of the United States of America and a qualified and legally registered Florida voter. Mr. Limage is of Haitian descent. 12. Plaintiff PAMELA GOMEZ is a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. Ms. Gomez is a citizen of the United States of America and a qualified and legally registered Florida voter. Ms. Gomez is of Hispanic, specifically, Dominican descent. 13. Plaintiff MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND is a national non-profit organization dedicated to working with the Latino community to increase civic participation. MFVEF maintains a Florida office at 615 Herndon Avenue, Suite F, Orlando, Florida 32803. A core component of MFVEF's mission is to increase voter registration and voting by eligible Latino citizens. To achieve this goal, MFVEF registers voters and engages in voter education campaigns via television, radio and print media announcements, distribution of voter-registration literature, and voter mobilization efforts. The Secretary of State's new voter registration procedures will frustrate MFVEF's mission by interfering with its efforts to register eligible voters and increase civic engagement in the Latino community. Further, it will force MFVEF to divert resources from its regular activities to educate and assist voters in complying with the new purge procedures. 14. The rights this suit seeks to vindicate are germane to the purposes of the organizational plaintiff, and the claims alleged herein do not require the participation of its individual clients in the lawsuit. Indeed, without the relief requested herein, the organization
4
US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

will be harmed by the substantial diversion of its resources and the frustration of its organizational purposes.
15. Defendant KEN DETZNER ("Defendant" or "Secretary of State") is the Secretary of State of Florida and is sued in his official capacity. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 92.012, the Secretary of State is the chief election officer of Florida, and as such, is responsible for the administration of state laws affecting voting, and for assuring that elections in the State are conducted in accordance with the law. The Secretary of State is required to provide written direction and opinions to the Supervisors of Elections on the performance of their official duties. Defendant Detzner is the state official responsible for seeking preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of any changes affecting voting practices or procedures enacted by the state legislature. The Defendant's principal office is in Tallahassee, Florida.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAW A. The Defendant Implemented List Maintenance Procedures Based Upon Database
Matching to Attempt to Purge Eligible Registered Voters Without Preclearance 16. The State of Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in that state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America. See Fla. Stat. § 97.041. 17. The State of Florida assigns responsibility to its county Supervisors of Elections to ensure that any eligible applicant for voter registration is registered to vote. See Fla. Stat. § 98.045(1). Supervisors of Elections must conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance. See Fla. Stat. § 98.065. The Department of State must ensure the maintenance of accurate and cun-ent voter registration records. See Fla. Stat. § 98.075. 18. Prior to 2010, individuals in Florida were permitted to apply for a driver's license without providing proof of citizenship but were required to advise the DHSMV whether they had
5
US_ACTIVE:144021309\7\99995.3430

citizenship at the time of application. This information was included in the drivers' license database maintained by the DHSMV.
19. Beginning on or about January 1, 2010, the DHSMV began to require individuals applying for a new or renewed driver's license or state photo identification card to provide documentary proof of identity and lawful status in the United States. The cycle for all renewals will not be completed until December 1, 2017. At that point, DHSMV records should be updated with supporting documentation of legal status.
20. Upon infOl111ation and belief, Florida has never attempted to update the records of the DHSMV to reflect individuals who have become naturalized United States citizens after obtaining a Florida drivers' license. Citizenship status is only updated in the DHSMV's database at the time of driver's license renewals.
21. Prior to April 2, 2012, the State of Florida had no legally enforceable procedure for systematically instituting voter registration list maintenance procedures against individual registered voters based upon citizenship information maintained by the DHSMV.
22. Upon information and belief, on or before April 2011, the Florida Division of Elections began to produce lists of Florida registered voters that it classified as suspected noncitizens based upon administrative records matching between the FVRS database and the DHSMV database.
23. On or about April 2, 2012, the Florida Secretary of State and the Florida Division of Elections notified all county Supervisors of Elections via email entitled "List Maintenance Information and webinar" that they would be receiving lists of potential non-citizens in an Excel spreadsheet on CD via FedEx, and that "a webinar is being created to assist you with processing these files, and to inform you of the process of vetting the files."
6
US_ACTIVE: \44021309\7\99995.3430

24. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State directed the county Supervisors
of Elections to conduct the following actions:
Initiate notice (within 7 days). Send notice by certified mail, return receipt requested or by some other means of verified delivery). Notice must include: A statement of basis for ineligibility; [a] copy of any supporting documentation, Print out the latest screen shot from the DHSMV DAVE containing legal status. This is what DHSMV has last recorded. Redact confidential/personal identifying information such as DL, state ID #, SSN, and signature; [a] statement that failure to respond within 30 days may result in removal from rolls; [a] return form that requires voter to admit or deny accuracy of information; [a] statement that a person denying ineligibility has a right to a hearing; [c]ontact information for Supervisor of Elections; [i]nstructions for seeking restoration of civil rights (Not applicable in these cases).
(Emphasis in original).
25. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State provided the county Supervisors
of Elections with a "Suggested Sample Notice to Send Potentially Ineligible Non-U.S. Citizen."
The sample notice stated, in part, that "[i]f you fail to respond within thiliy (30) days, we may
determine that you are ineligible and remove your name from the voter registration rolls. You
will then no longer be eligible [sic] to vote." (emphasis added).
26. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State directed the county Supervisors
of Elections to: "Allow voter 30 days to respond (if you receive verification that mail
delivered); [p1ublish notice ONLY if notice undeliverable (Section 98.075(7)(a)2.a.-e, Fla.
Stat.); [p]rovide hearing ONLY if person denies ineligibility AND person requests hearing."
(emphasis in original).
27. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State provided the county Supervisors
of Elections with "Pointers." These pointers advised that "[i]t is strongly encouraged but not
required (for continuing registration purposes) that a registered voter who is determined to be a
U.S. citizen to contact DHSMV to correct or update his or her legal status on record."
7
US_ACTIVE: 14402130917199995 .3430

28. In an April 2012 webinar for the county Supervisors of Elections, the Secretary of State provided further "Pointers." These pointers directed that:
If you determine that a registered voter initially identified as not a U.S. citizen has subsequently become a U.S. citizen, this person shall be deemed eligible for purposes of continuing registration and should not be removed from the rolls. HOWEVER, the matter should be referred to the State Attorney. See Section 104.011 (false swearing of an application) and Section 104.42, F.S. ('duty to report fraudulent registration and illegal voting'). 29. On May 9, 2012, the Secretary of State issued a press release announcing that the Florida Division of Elections had compared the FVRA database and the DHSMV database to identify potential non-citizens. This press release announced that the Secretary of State had sent the names of more than 2,600 potential non-citizens to Florida's 67 county Supervisors of Elections for "review and, if warranted, removal from the voter rolls." 30. The Secretary of State has neither provided nor required uniform statewide procedures to be applied by county Supervisors of Elections in evaluating whether individuals whose names appear on the aforementioned Excel spreadsheets are United States citizens. Further, the Secretary of State has not specified the documentation that may be produced by such an individual in order to prove citizenship. Instead, the Secretary of State merely advised all county Supervisors of Elections of different documents that may be acceptable proof of citizenship. 31. Several counties 111 the State, including Hillsborough County, used the stategenerated report as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship. See Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7). The mailing notified the voter that if he or she failed to respond within 30 days, the voter mayor will be removed from the voting list.
8
US_ACTIVE 14402130917199995. 3430

32. Upon information and belief, a disproportionate share of the individuals against whom the Secretary of State has directed purge procedures to be instituted on the basis of the aforementioned list are racial and language minorities.
33. Upon information and belief, the Secretary of State is aware that the aforementioned list is erroneously targeting large numbers of voters, because hundreds of the affected individuals already have established that they are United States citizens and lawfully registered voters.
34. On or about May 31, 2012, the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, sent a letter to the Secretary of State advising that Defendant implemented and enforced the new voter purge procedures without Section 5 preclearance. Specifically, the Department of Justice's letter infonned the Secretary of State that the matching procedures implemented to verify the eligibility of registered voters, and the subsequent notification and possible removal of registered voters from the voter rolls, is a change affecting voting in the five Florida counties that are subject to Section 5 of the Voting Rights, and that such change was not submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for judicial review or to the Attorney General for administrative review as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. A copy of the May 31, 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
35. On June 6, 2012, the Secretary of State responded to the Department of Justice's letter, disagreeing with the Department of Justice's position and asserting that the new voter purge procedures are consistent with federal law, including the Voting Rights Act.
36. On June 1,2012, the ACLU Foundation of Florida, Inc., the ACLU Voting Rights Project, and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law sent Defendant a notice letter on behalf of Plaintiffs advising the Secretary of State and the Florida Division of Elections that
9
US_ACTIVE:14402130917199995.3430

the new voter purge procedures are being conducted in violation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. The letter also provided the statutory notice of a violation of the NVRA, allowing the Plaintiffs to file suit under the NVRA at the conclusion of the 20-day waiting period.
37. To date, the Defendant has not responded to Plaintiffs' June 1, 2012 letter. B. The State of Florida Violated the Preclearance Requirements of Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act 38. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965,42 U.S.C. §1973c, is a temporary provision that prohibits changes in election practices or procedures in states and political subdivisions with a documented history of discriminatory voting practices until the new procedures have been determined, either by a declaratory judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or by the absence of an objection by the United States Attorney General, not to have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. This process is referred to as Section 5 "preclearance." 39. The Florida counties of Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe are currently covered under Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, and Section 5 preclearance is required prior to implementing any changes to election practices or procedures affecting those counties. 40. The actions of the Secretary of State in instituting voter registration list maintenance procedures based upon motor vehicles data matching constitute changes affecting voting that require Section 5 preclearance. At the time this purge program was instituted in April 2012, it was a new, systematic process that placed currently registered voters at risk of being removed from the voter registration rolls, and was intended to result in currently registered
10
US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995. 34 30

voters being removed from the voter registration rolls. No practice or procedure requiring voter purging on the basis of motor vehicles data matching was in effect in Florida on November 1, 1972, nor has Florida obtained Section 5 preclearance since that date to conduct voter purging on the basis of motor vehicles data matching.
41. These actions, which involve the generation and distribution of reports to county Supervisors of Elections as the basis for voter challenges, hearings, correspondence and/or removal, constitute voting changes which require Section 5 preclearance before they lawfully can be implemented in Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, or Monroe County.
42. All of these voting changes were implemented by the Defendant without having first obtained Section 5 preclearance. C. Plaintiff Murat Limage's Voting Rights Have Been Violated
43. Plaintiff Murat Limage is a United States citizen, a lawfully registered voter, and a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida.
44. Mr. Limage received a driver's license from the Florida DHSMV in 1999 and last updated his driver's license November 6, 2008. Mr. Limage naturalized as a United States citizen on October 19, 2010 and registered to vote on November 1, 2010. Mr. Limage changed his address in or around November of 2011 and contacted the Hillsborough county Supervisor of Elections office to update their voter registration records to reflect his new address. Mr. Limage subsequently received a voter registration card at his new address.
45. Mr. Limage received a letter from the Supervisor of Elections of Hillsborough County, dated Aprill3, 2012, indicating that they were "notified that [Mr. Limage] may not be a US Citizen" and requiring documentation evidencing his citizenship. The letter further advised that the "failure to submit the [citizenship information] within (30) days may result in the
11
US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

removal of [Mr. Limage's] name from the voter registration rolls" and he would no longer be eligible to vote.
46. Mr. Limage was required to prove his citizenship by providing either a copy of his driver's license, passport, birth certificate, or other document verifying that he was a United States citizen. Accordingly, Mr. Limage drove to the Hillsborough County Elections and Registration Office in order to prove his citizenship.
47. Mr. Limage presented his United States passport to a Supervisor of Elections office official. The official photocopied his passpOli and told him that he would not receive written confirmation that he had provided proof of citizenship, but that he was not required to take any further action. Mr. Limage to date has received no official documentation of the fact that he corrected his designation as a non-citizen. Mr. Limage remains concerned that he will not be permitted to vote in the upcoming election. D. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez's Voting Rights Have Been Violated
48. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez is a United States citizen, a lawfully registered voter, and a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. She has been a resident of Florida since July 2005.
49. Ms. Gomez received a driver's license from the Florida DHSMV February 20, 2006 and has not since been required to renew her driver's license. She naturalized as a United States citizen in February 2011 and registered to vote that same day.
50. Ms. Gomez has yet to receive a letter from the Supervisor of Elections requesting proof of her citizenship but expects that her voter eligibility may be challenged because her DHSMV records may not currently reflect her United States citizenship.
12
US_ACT1VE:14402130917199995.3430

E. MFVEF's Rights Have Been Violated 51. Plaintiff MFVEF is a national non-profit organization dedicated to working with
the Latino community in Florida and across the nation to increase civic participation. 52. MFVEF engages in voter registration activities, voter education campaigns via
television, radio and print media announcements, distribution of voter-registration literature, and voter mobilization efforts which include transportation to the voting polls. From March 1, 2012 to June 5, 2012, MFVEF has registered 6,318 voters in Florida. Of that number, 3,294 are registered in Hillsborough County.
53. The Defendant's new voter purge procedures will frustrate MFVEF's organizational mission by interfering with its eff011s to register eligible voters particularly among newly-naturalized citizens and diverting its limited resources to assisting voters in complying with the new purge procedures.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF CLAIM ONE
(Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) 54. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference paragraphs I through 53 as if fully set f011h herein. 55. Defendant has failed to secure Section 5 preclearance for the new voter purge procedures identified in Paragraphs 22-31 above, as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.c. § 1973c, in Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough and Monroe Counties. 56. Any removal of registered voters, threatened removal of registered voters, or other implementation of the new voter purge procedures identified in Paragraphs 22-31 above, without Section 5 preclearance, is void and violates the rights of Plaintiffs as secured by Section
13
US _ACTIVE:\44021309\ 7\99995.3430

5 of the Voting Rights Act. Unless enjoined, Defendant will proceed with the voter removals in violation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
57. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaratory judgment that Defendant's implementation of the new voter purge procedures violates Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and to an injunction prohibiting the implementation of the new voter purge procedures and restoring the legally enforceable status quo ante unless and until Section 5 preclearance has been obtained fi-om the United States Department of Justice or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
REQUEST FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF 58. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973c and 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Plaintiffs seek a declaration that Defendant's implementation and use of the new voter purge procedures absent preclearance by the Department of Justice or the United States District Court for the District of Cohunbia violates the right of Plaintiffs as secured by the Voting Rights Act.
BASIS FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF 59. Plaintiffs have no plain, adequate or complete remedy at law to redress the wrongs alleged herein and this suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is their only means of securing adequate redress from Defendant's unlawful practices. Plaintiffs will continue to suffer irreparable injury from Defendant's acts, policies and practices set forth herein unless Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court enter Judgment granting Plaintiffs:
A. A declaratory judgment that Defendant's actions violate the rights of Plaintiffs as secured by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965,42 U.S.c. § 1973c.
14
USyCTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

B. Injunctive relief enjoining Defendant, his successors in office, agents, employees, attorneys and those persons acting in concert with him or at his direction from using and implementing the new voter purge procedures, and ordering Defendant to employ his full authority to direct all county Supervisors of Elections to cease using the citizenship check feature of the voter registration database as the basis for voter challenges and hearings. C. Engage in affinnative, corrective measures, including but not limited to sending letters rescinding its previous correspondence to county Supervisors of Elections relating to the new voter purge procedures and to report immediately to the Court any county that refuses to comply; D. An order of this Court retaining jurisdiction over this matter until the Defendant has complied with all the orders and mandates of the Court; E. The costs of this suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees; and, F. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DATED: June 8,2012

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Edward Soto WElL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Edward Soto Florida Bar No. 0265144 Edward McCarthy Florida Bar No. 683701 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1200 Miami, Florida Tel: (305) 577-3100 Edward.soto(Q),weil.com Edward. mccarthy(@weil.com

15
US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

Isl Robert Kengle
LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW Robert Kengle Dara Lindenbaum 1401 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 662-8324 Bkengleia!Lawyerscomm ittee. org
DLindenbaum(~Lawyerscommittee.org
lsi Randall C. Marshall
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA, INC. Randall C. Marshall Florida Bar No. 181765 Julie Ebenstein Florida Bar No. 91033 4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340 Miami, Florida 33137-3227 Tel. 786-363-2700 Fax 786-363-1108 rmarshull@uclufl.org jebenstein0.lac1ufl. 0 rg
lsi M. Laughlin McDonald
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION M. Laughlin McDonald Katie O'Connor 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 523-2721 lmcdonald@aclu.org koconnor0.laclu.org
16
US_ACTIVE:\44021309\7\99995.3430

 
 Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket

Printed By: Joseph Chatham on Thursday, September 20, 2012 - 7:43 PM

Related Search Criteria
Search Term Date Type
Sources

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund No Date Selection Search (Docket) U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Dockets

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket
General Information

Case Name Docket Number Court Nature of Suit

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner 8:12-cv-01294 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Civil Rights: Voting

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382? documentName=30.pdf&amp;fmt=pdf

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, and PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CASE NO: 8:12-cv-1294-T-27MAP

Three Judge Court (CRW, JDW, JSM)

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.
----------------------------~'
ORDER

BEFORE THE COURT1 is the Secretary's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint

(Dkt. 25). Defendant Ken Detzner, in his official capacity, moves to dismiss the First Amended Complaint on the ground that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs oppose the motion to dismiss (Dkt. 27). The

United States has also filed a Statement of Interest (Dkt. 22) and a Supplemental Statement of

Interest opposing the motion to dismiss (Dkt. 26). For the reasons set forth below, the Secretary's

Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25) is due to be denied.

Applicable Standard

Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint provide "a

short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief," in order to "give

1 This Court has properly been convened as a three-judge court under 28 U.S.C. § 2284 and 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.

the defendant fair notice ofwhat the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Bell At/. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
Although a complaint need not include detailed factual allegations, it must contain sufficient factual allegations, which, when taken as true, "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." !d. "The plausibility standard is not akin to a 'probability requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully." !d. "[W]here the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged - but it has not 'show[n] '-'that the pleader is entitled to relief."' Id. at 679 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)). A well-pleaded complaint, however, may survive a motion to dismiss even if it appears ''that recovery is very remote and unlikely." Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 555 (quoting Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974)).
While the Court must accept all factual allegations as true in evaluating a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the tenet does not apply to legal conclusions. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 677-78. Similarly, a court may dismiss a complaint on a dispositive issue of law. Marshall County Bd of Educ. v. Marshall County Gas Dist., 992 F.2d 1171, 1174 (11th Cir. 1993).
Introduction Plaintiffs allege that Defendant failed to obtain preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c (the "Voting Rights Act"), before implementing certain changes in standards, practices, and procedures affecting voting in five counties covered by the Voting Rights Act. See First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 20), ~ 2. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and
2

injunctive reliefprohibiting Defendant from continuing to implement the alleged changes unless and until Defendant obtains Section 5 preclearance from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney General. See id. at~ 3.
The only question before the Court on the pending motion to dismiss whether the Complaint contains sufficient allegations to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In ruling on the motion to dismiss, the Court is not adjudicating the underlying merit of Plaintiffs' claims. As discussed below, while a substantial question exists whether Defendant has implemented a change subject to preclearance under the Voting Rights Act, the allegations in the Complaint are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
Background On June 6, 2012, Mi Familia Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), filed this action against Ken Detzner, as Florida Secretary of State ("Defendant"). Plaintiff Murat Limage is ofHatian descent. First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 20), ~ 14. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez is of Hispanic, specifically, Dominican descent. Id. at~ 15. Both Limage and Gomez are residents ofHillsborough County, Florida, citizens ofthe United States, and are legally registered to vote in Florida. I d. at~~ 14-15. Although legally registered and entitled to vote in Florida, Limage and Gomez assert that they are concerned that they will not be permitted to vote in the upcoming election due to actions taken by Defendant in an attempt to remove unauthorized voters from voter registration lists. See id. at~~ 56, 59. PlaintiffMi Familia Education Fund ("Mi Familia") is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to working with the Latino community to increase civic participation through increased voter registration and voting by eligible Latino citizens. Id. at~ 16. Mi Familia contends that
3

Defendant's recent efforts to remove unauthorized voters from voter registration lists will interfere with its efforts to register eligible voters and force it to divert resources from its regular activities.

!d. at ~~ 16, 60.

The Database Matching Program

In the Spring of 2012, the Florida Division of Elections (the "Division") announced its intention to use a database-matching program to develop lists of registered voters that it classified as suspected non-citizens and to furnish the lists to individual Supervisors of Elections with the directive that they attempt to contact the individuals identified by the Division and, if appropriate, remove them from the voter rolls (the "Database Matching Program"). See, e.g., id. at~~ 25, 32. Plaintiffs allege that prior to the creation of the Database Matching Program, Florida had no legally-enforceable procedure for systematically instituting voter registration list maintenance procedures against individual registered voters based on citizenship information maintained by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV"). !d. at~ 24.
The Division originally generated its lists of suspected non-citizens by companng information maintained by the DHSMV with the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS") database. ld at~ 2. Specifically, the Division compared the list of individuals registered to vote in the FVRS database to the list of individuals identified as non-citizens in the DHSMV database. See id. at~ 25. Plaintiffs contend that this procedure was flawed in numerous respects and produced lists that erroneously targeted lawfully-registered voters, including a disproportionate share ofracial and language minorities. !d. at~~ 35-36.2 For example, Plaintiffs note that the DHSMV database failed

2 This Court lacks the authority to consider whether the Database Matching Program does or does not have a discriminatory purpose or effect. See Perkins v. Matthews, 400 U.S. 379, 385 (1971) ("What is foreclosed to such district court is what Congress expressly reserved for consideration by the District Court for the District of Columbia
4

to take into account situations when an individual became a naturalized United States citizen after
obtaining a Florida drivers' license. !d. at 23. The Division recently revised the Database Matching
Program to include new information available via the United States Citizenship and Immigration
Service's Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements ("SAVE") database. See, e.g., id. at~~ 2,
Florida and the Voting Rights Act
The Voting Rights Act "was designed by Congress to banish the blight of racial
discrimination in voting, which ha[d] infected the electoral process in parts ofour country for nearly
a century." South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 308 (1966). Five Florida counties-
Hillsborough, Monroe, Collier, Hendry, and Hardee- are covered jurisdictions under Section 5 of
the Voting Rights Act. See 28 C.F.R. Pt. 51, App.; see also 41 Fed. Reg. 34329 (Aug. 13, 1976);
40 Fed. Reg. 43746 (Sept. 23, 1975). "Section 5 requires covered jurisdictions to obtain what has
come to be known as 'preclearance' from the District Court for the District of Columbia or the DOJ
before 'enact[ing] or seek[ing] to administer' any alteration oftheir practices or procedures affecting
voting." Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 412 (2008). There is no dispute that Defendant did not
or the Attorney General-the determination whether a covered change does or does not have the purpose or effect 'of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color."'). The goal of a three-judge district court facing a § 5 challenge must be to ensure that the covered jurisdiction submits its election plan to the appropriate federal authorities for preclearance as expeditiously as possible." Lopez v. Monterey County, Cal., 519 U.S. 9, 23 (1996) (Lopez 1). Thus, the only issues before the Court are whether Section 5 covers the Database Matching Program, whether Section 5's approval requirements were satisfied, and if the requirements were not satisfied, what temporary remedy, if any, is appropriate. Jd at 24.
3 Defendant originally sent a list of2,600 potential non-citizens to county Supervisors of Elections during May 9, 2012. Id at~ 32. After concerns arose regarding the accuracy of the information contained in this initial list, Defendant indicated that on or before June 27, 2012, Florida had temporarily ceased furnishing Supervisors ofElections with lists of suspected non-citizens. Jd at~ 40. The Division recently indicated its intention to resume the Database Matching Program after the Department of Homeland Security informed Florida that it would provide access to the SAVE database. See id at~~ 43, 45
5

submit the Database Matching Program for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

See 28 C.F.R. §§ 51.26-51.28.

Contentions

Defendant argues that dismissal is warranted because (1) the State ofFlorida is not a covered jurisdiction under Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act, (2) Plaintiffs have failed to identify any change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5 preclearance, and (3) Plaintiffs seek to bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section 5 violation that exists in only five ofFlorida's 67 counties. Plaintiffs respond that the motion to dismiss should be denied because substantial

authority supports their claims and they should be afforded an opportunity to conduct discovery in

support of those claims.

Covered Jurisdiction

Defendant argues that the State ofFlorida is not a coveredjurisdiction under Section 5 ofthe

Voting Rights Act. In response, Plaintiffs argue that Defendant is the proper party because he developed the new voter purge procedures at issue, he maintains control over the relevant information and decision-making, and he is the appropriate state election official to submit the new

voter procedures for preclearance on behalf of the covered counties.

The Supreme Court has recognized that in states only partially covered by Section 5, "§ 5's preclearance requirement applies to a covered county's nondiscretionary efforts to implement a voting change required by state law, notwithstanding the fact that the State is not itself a covered jurisdiction." Lopezv. Monterey County, 525 U.S. 266,282 (1999) (Lopez II). Morever, "[a] State, whether partially or fully covered, has authority to submit any voting change on behalfofits covered jurisdictions and political subunits." 28 C.F.R. § 51.23. At least one district court has recognized

6

that "Congress intended that either the legislative body that enacted the legislation or the executive body that was responsible for administering the legislation would be responsible for obtaining preclearance." Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F.Supp. 2d 1150, 1156 (D. S.D. 2002)
Under the facts alleged in this case, Secretary Detzner is an appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action because his office adopted and is responsible for administrating the Database Matching Program. See Bone Shirt, 200 F.Supp. 2d at 1156 (holding that "[u]nder the plain meaning of the Voting Rights Act, the State of South Dakota is an entity that must secure preclearance from the Attorney General or bring a declaratory judgment action" for review ofa law passed by the state legislature that impacts voting in covered counties); see also Haith v. Martin, 618 F.Supp. 410 (D. N.C. 1985) (enforcement action brought against governor, attorney general, secretary of state, and board of elections); Clayton v. North Carolina Bd ofElections, 317 F. Supp. 915, 919 (E.D. N.C. 1970) (enjoining, in covered counties, an unprecleared state law in a partially
covered state in a case filed against state actors). In fact, it cannot reasonably be disputed that it is
Defendant that has all of the information regarding the development of the Database Matching Program and the manner by which the lists of suspect voters were generated. As a result, the Defendant is the proper party to explain the purpose and effect of voting changes he implemented. See 28 C.F.R. § 51.23 (noting that a "State is better able to explain to the Attorney General the purpose and effect of voting changes it enacts than are the individual coveredjurisdictions").4
4 As the United States notes, Florida recently filed an action in the District Court of the District of Columbia seeking Section 5 preclearance with respect to other voting changes, see Florida v. United States, No. 11-1428, 2012 WL 3538298 (D. D.C. 2012), and that "[i]t would be highly unusual for Florida to be the appropriate plaintiff to bring a Section 5lawsuit seekingjudicial preclearance but not be an appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action."
7

Change in Voting Practice or Procedure Defendant also argues that Plaintiffs have failed to identify any change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5 preclearance. Specifically, Defendant argues that the use of a new source of information to confirm voter eligibility (e.g., the DHSMV or SAVE databases) is not a change subject to preclearance because it is not a change to an existing standard, practice, or procedure. Plaintiffs counter that the changes to the manner in which covered counties remove and threaten to remove registered voters from the voter rolls represent a change in voting practices or procedures. Section 5 provides that "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting" is subject to "preclearance" in covered jurisdictions. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the phrase "standard, practice, or procedure" must be given the "broadest possible scope" in order to effectuate the articulated purposes ofthe Voting Rights Act. Allen v. State Board ofElections, 393 U.S. 544,567 (1978); accord Dougherty County, Georgia, Board ofEduc. v. White, 439 U.S. 32, 38 (1978). Covered changes are changes that bear a direct relation to voting, including changes "in the composition of the electorate that may vote for candidates for a given office." Presley v. Etowah County Comm'n, 502 U.S. 491, 502-03, 510 (1993). Even minor changes require preclearance. Young v. Fordice, 520 U.S. 273, 284 (1997). "In order to determine whether an election practice constitutes a 'change' as that term is defined in ... § 5," a court must "compare the practice with the covered jurisdiction's 'baseline."' Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 421 (2008). The "baseline" is "the most recent practice that was both precleared and 'in force or effect' -or, absent any change since the jurisdictions coverage date, the practice that was 'in force or effect' on that date." /d "The
8

question is whether the [covered jurisdiction] has enacted or is seeking to administer a practice or
procedure that is different enough from the baseline to qualify as a change." !d.
Defendant contends that the fact that Supervisors of Elections are now provided with information on citizenship that is derived from a different source than previous information "does not remotely 'change' either the citizenship 'qualification' or the long-standing 'practice' of inquiring into a registered voter's citizenship status when there is reason to do so." Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25), p. 15. However, Plaintiffs argue that prior to 2012, the State of Florida did not use the DHSMV or SAVE databases to identify suspected non-citizens in connection with its efforts to maintain voter registration rolls. See Morales v. Handel, 1:08-CV3172,21-22 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 27, 2008) (concluding that Georgia's use of driver's license and social security databases to verify voter citizenship constituted a change from baseline practices or procedures requiring preclearance under Section 5).
Defendant also argues that the Florida laws requiring the maintenance of accurate voting registrations, requiring the removal of ineligible voters from voter rolls, and allowing the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials in order to identify ineligible voters have all been precleared under Section 5. As a result, Defendant contends that construing the Database Matching Program as a "change" in voting practice, procedure, or qualification would require the Secretary to obtain preclearance any time he obtained information bearing on voter eligibility from a new source (e.g., a new government database, a newspaper article or internet report, or a tip from a private citizen). Defendant further argues that such an interpretation would directly contravene the
9

Secretary's precleared authorization to act on any "information ... that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she is not a United States citizen." Fla. Stat. § 98.705(6).5
An administrative effort to comply with a statute that has already received clearance may require separate preclearance because Section 5 reaches informal as well as formal changes. See Foreman v. Dallas County, Tex., 521 U.S. 979, 980-81 (1997) (per curiam) (quoting NAACP v. Hampton County Election Commission, 470 U.S. 166, 178 (1985)).6 Similarly, changes made in an effort to comply with federal law require preclearance when those changes reflect policy choices made by state or local officials. Young, 520 U.S. at 284. Thus, Plaintiffs argue, the mere fact that Defendant has implemented the Database Matching Program in an effort to comply with state or federal law does not necessarily exclude the program from Section 5's preclearance requirement. See Young, 520 U.S. at 285 ("Insofar as [new administrative practices] embody discretionary decisions that have a potential for discriminatory impact, they are appropriate matters for review under § 5's
preclearance process."). Defendant also argues that the Database Matching Program is not a change to the "baseline"
practice in any covered county because the covered counties have not changed the qualifications for voter eligibility or the notice-and-hearing procedure for removing an ineligible individual from the voter registration list. Plaintiffs respond that this argument ignores the practical effect of the Database Matching Program, which was developed and implemented by Defendant. See Janie v.
5 Florida has submitted other changes related to its implementation of voter registration list maintenance procedures involving the use of database matching for preclearance under Section 5. See Submission No. 2005-2390 (Dkt. 22, Ex. 1); Submission No. 2011-2197 (Dkt. 22, Ex. 2).
6 The Department of Justice specifically noted, in preclearing the statutory provisions relied on by Defendant, that those provisions were enabling in nature and, therefore, Florida was not relieved of its responsibility to seek preclearance ofany changes affecting voting proposed to be implemented or adopted pursuant to those provisions. See Statement of Interest (Dkt. 26), Ex. 1d & Ex. 2d.
10

Nelson, No. CR. 09-5019-KES, 2009 WL 5216902, at *7 (D. S.D. Dec. 30, 2009) (concluding that state representatives were proper defendants in action brought under the Voting Rights Act when they were authorized to promulgate rules relating to voting matters and voter file maintenance even though county auditor was individual responsible for removal ofvoter from list ofregistered voters).
While a substantial question exists as to whether the use of new data sources in connection with a finite number ofprospective voters constitutes a "change" to voting practices or procedures subject to Section 5 preclearance, this issue is best resolved on summary judgment rather than on a motion to dismiss. For purposes of surviving a motion to dismiss, when all factual allegations are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs have adequately pled that the Database Matching Program constitutes a change to "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice or procedure with respect to voting" subject to preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. See 42 U.S.C. §1973c(a); see also Allen, 393 U.S. 544, 567 (1978) ("Congress intended to reach any state enactment which altered the election law ofa covered State in even a minor way."). This result is also consistent with the general rule that any doubt as to whether "changes" are covered by Section 5 should be resolved in favor ofthe Attorney General's construction ofthe Voting Rights Act. See United States v. Sheffield Board ofCommissioners, 435
u.s. 110, 131 (1978).
Scope ofInjunctive Relief Defendant's final argument is that Plaintiffs seek to bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section 5 violation that exists in only five ofFlorida's 67 counties. Plaintiffs concede in their response to the motion to dismiss, however, that they only seek an injunctive relief with respect to the five counties covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
11

Conclusion The First Amended Complaint contains factual allegations sufficient to provide Defendant with fair notice of Plaintiffs' claims and those allegations, when taken as true, state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. See Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 677-78; Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 55556. While the allegations in the First Amended Complaint are sufficient to state a claim against Defendant, this Order is not, nor is it intended to be, a comment or decision on the merits of Plaintiffs' claim. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Secretary's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25) is DENIED.
..,.,
DONE AND ORDERED this .LJ.::day of September, 2012.

Copies to: The Honorable Charles R. Wilson The Honorable James S. Moody Counsel of Record

ited States District Judge Middle District of Florida
CHARLES R. WILSON United States Circuit Judge Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
JAMES S. MOODY United States District Judge Middle District of Florida

12

 
 Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket

Printed By: Joseph Chatham on Thursday, September 20, 2012 - 8:56 PM

Related Search Criteria
Search Term Date Type
Sources

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund No Date Selection Search (Docket) U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Dockets

Part Description 1 25 pages 2 Exhibit 1 3 Exhibit 2 4 Exhibit 3 5 Exhibit 4

Multiple Documents

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=20.xml

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 25 PageID 57

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization; MURAT LIMAGE; PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Civil Action No.: 08:12-cv-01294

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant. _____________________________________/

DEFENDANT SECRETARY OF STATE KEN DETZNER’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant Ken Detzner, Florida Secretary of State (“Secretary”), respectfully moves,

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Plaintiffs’

Complaint “fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6),

because the State is not a covered jurisdiction under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the

Secretary voluntarily abandoned the activity that Plaintiffs challenge before Plaintiffs filed suit,

Plaintiffs have failed to identify any change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5

preclearance, and Plaintiffs seek to bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section

5 violation that exists, even under their own theory, in only five of Florida’s 67 counties.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

As the United States Department of Justice recently emphasized before the Supreme

Court, “the federal and state governments have a compelling interest in excluding foreign

citizens” from the political process. Motion of the United States to Dismiss or Affirm at 11,

Bluman v. FEC, 132 S. Ct. 1087 (2012) (No. 11-275), 2011 WL 5548718. Such an exclusion is

neither an “invidious attack” on these individuals nor “a deficiency in the democratic system”;

WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 2 of 25 PageID 58
rather, it is “a necessary consequence of the community’s process of political self-definition.” Id. at 15 (quoting Cabell v. Chave-Salido, 454 U.S. 432, 439 (1981)).
Plaintiffs acknowledge that “[t]he State of Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in th[e] state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America.” Compl. ¶ 16. Plaintiffs also acknowledge that Florida law validly requires the Secretary to “ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records” and the Supervisors of Elections in each county (“county supervisors”) to “conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance.” Id. ¶ 17. Moreover, though Plaintiffs fail to mention it, Florida law mandates a notice-and-hearing procedure before an individual may be removed from the voter registration list. See § 98.075(7), Fla. Stat.
All of these state laws have been precleared under Section 5. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ (Ex. 1) (referenced at Compl. ¶ 35); see also A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida, available at http://election.dos.state.fl.us/publications/pdf/2011/2011Election Laws_04-12-2012.pdf (last visited July 5, 2012). Plaintiffs therefore do not challenge any of these requirements or the Secretary’s compliance with them. See Compl. ¶¶ 16–31. And Plaintiffs do not allege that the Secretary sought to change any requirement of voter eligibility or the precleared notice-and-hearing removal procedure. See id.
Instead, the “change” purportedly requiring Section 5 preclearance that Plaintiffs allege is the Secretary’s recent—and now discontinued—use of a new source of information to confirm compliance with Florida’s valid voter eligibility requirements. Id. ¶ 17. In particular, Plaintiffs claim that the Secretary violated Section 5 when he matched the voter registration list against citizenship data from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ (“DHSMV”) MAN Driver and Vehicle Express (“MDAVE”) database, and then transmitted that
2
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 3 of 25 PageID 59
data to county supervisors, who were to initiate the statutory notice-and-hearing removal procedure for potentially ineligible individuals. See Compl. ¶¶ 22–31.
This tortured Section 5 claim fails for at least four simple reasons. First, as Plaintiffs concede, the State is not a “covered jurisdiction” under Section 5 (see Compl. ¶¶ 41, 55; 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix)—so Section 5 does not provide a cause of action against the State. As Plaintiffs further concede, only five of Florida’s 67 counties are covered jurisdictions (see Compl. ¶¶ 41, 55), so Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim runs, if at all, only against those counties. Yet the Secretary, in his official capacity on behalf of the non-covered State, is the only defendant that Plaintiffs joined and against whom they seek relief. See id. ¶ 15.
Second, the Secretary discontinued the MDAVE data matching more than one month before Plaintiffs filed their Complaint. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ. This eliminates any justiciable case or controversy, and demonstrates that neither the Secretary nor a county supervisor from any covered jurisdiction “seek[s] to administer” any Section 5 change in voting practice or procedure. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a).
Third, even if the State were a covered jurisdiction and had not discontinued its MDAVE data matching, Plaintiffs fail to identify any change in voting practice or procedure requiring Section 5 preclearance. Indeed, Plaintiffs’ theory makes no sense because it would freeze the Secretary into using antiquated, unreliable sources of information to implement the State’s valid voter eligibility requirements unless and until more current and reliable sources received preclearance. Such a regime would impede, rather than advance, the efficient administration of precleared election laws.
Plaintiffs allege that the Secretary’s data matching was discriminatory because it generated “false positives” of registered voters who were actually citizens. See id. ¶ 32. Yet the
3
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 4 of 25 PageID 60
reason that the Secretary sought MDAVE data (and now seeks even more accurate data) is that such data was more reliable and uniform than previously available data. Plaintiffs thus seek to prohibit the Secretary from using increasingly more accurate data to assess citizenship.
In any event, even if the State were a covered jurisdiction, the Secretary’s data matching is not a Section 5 “change” because it simply is one of many ongoing implementations of a Florida law that has already been precleared. Florida law authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records,” § 98.093, Fla. Stat., and directs him to share with the county supervisor any information indicating “that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” id. § 98.075(6). The Secretary regularly receives and transmits to county supervisors data relating to voter eligibility from a host of state and federal agencies, including DHSMV—and merely continued that practice with the MDAVE data matching.
Plaintiffs, moreover, plainly do not believe that the Secretary’s data matching is a change in any covered county because they have not even joined any such county as a defendant. See Compl. ¶ 15. In fact, the only action by a covered county that Plaintiffs identify is Hillsborough County’s use of the matched data “as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship.” Id. ¶ 31. But, as Plaintiffs acknowledge with their citation to “Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7),” that action was required by Florida’s precleared notice-and-hearing removal procedure. Id. Thus, the Secretary’s reliance on a new source data has changed precisely nothing in the five covered counties, which continue to act on information received from the Secretary and to remove individuals that the county supervisors determine are ineligible in accordance with Florida’s precleared notice-and-hearing procedure.
4
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 5 of 25 PageID 61
Plaintiffs’ “change” argument also fails because it contravenes the federal Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”), which Plaintiffs do not so much as mention. HAVA specifically directs the Secretary to “match information in the database of the statewide voter registration system with information in the database of the [State’s] motor vehicle authority” in order “to verify the accuracy” of voter registration information. 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(5)(B)(i). The Secretary’s implementation of that federal requirement was not subject to preclearance as a matter of law, even if it had been undertaken by a covered jurisdiction.
In a last-ditch effort to save their “change” argument, Plaintiffs attempt to leverage a letter from the United States Department of Justice espousing the view that the Secretary’s MDAVE data matching was a change subject to preclearance. See Compl. ¶ 34. Yet the Justice Department has filed its own suit challenging the Secretary’s data matching, but has not advanced any Section 5 claim. The Justice Department’s decision to invest its resources in a suit without a Section 5 claim vividly underscores the incoherence of Plaintiffs’ allegation that data matching authorized by precleared state law and mandated by federal law is a “change” subject to Section 5 preclearance.
In fact, the Northern District of Florida denied the Justice Department’s motion for a temporary restraining order in part because the Secretary has discontinued the MDAVE data matching. See United States v. Florida, No. 4:12cv285, Order Denying A Temporary Restraining Order at 1 (N.D. Fla. June 28, 2012) (“DOJ Order”) (Ex.2). The Secretary has repeatedly requested (and been wrongfully denied) access to the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Database (SAVE), and has filed suit to obtain immediate access to that data. See Fla. Dep’t of State v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, No. 1:12-CV-00960 (D.D.C.). But Plaintiffs’ theory that Section 5 requires preclearance of the
5
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 6 of 25 PageID 62
non-covered State’s use of a new source of information to enforce valid election laws would delay, and perhaps even prevent, use of the SAVE data, even though it is more accurate and reliable than the MDAVE data Plaintiffs malign. See DOJ Order at 10. The Court should reject Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim and dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint in its entirety.
Finally, in the alternative, and at a minimum, the Court should reject Plaintiffs’ attempt to transform the alleged Section 5 violation in Florida’s five covered counties into a statewide injunction prohibiting the Secretary from implementing data matching and “ordering [him] to employ his full authority to direct all county Supervisors of Elections to cease” using the matched MDAVE data. Compl. ¶¶ B–C (emphasis added). Such a claim for relief in noncovered jurisdictions is beyond the Court’s Section 5 remedial authority and should be dismissed.
BACKGROUND A. The Secretary’s Data Matching As Plaintiffs recognize (Compl. ¶ 16), Florida requires a voter in any election in the State to be “a citizen of the United States.” § 97.041(1)(a)(2), Fla. Stat. Florida law further directs the Secretary to “protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records,” id. § 98.075(1), and authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records,” id. § 98.093. It further provides that if the Secretary or a county supervisor “receives information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” the supervisor must initiate the statutory notice-and-hearing procedure and—if the supervisor determines after that process that the registered voter is, in fact, ineligible—must remove the individual from the statewide voter registration list. Id. §§ 98.075(6)–(7). All of these state laws have been
6
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 7 of 25 PageID 63
precleared under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ; A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida.
Congress, through HAVA, has imposed similar duties on the Secretary. HAVA requires the Secretary “to ensure that voter registration records in the State are accurate and are updated regularly” in order to “remove registrants who are ineligible to vote from the official list of eligible voters.” 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(4). HAVA also places a specific non-discretionary duty on the Secretary to “match information in the database of the statewide voter registration system with information in the database of the [State’s] motor vehicle authority” in order “to verify the accuracy” of voter registration information. Id. § 15483(a)(5)(B)(i).
The Secretary and county supervisors regularly engage in data collection efforts to identify ineligible voters on the State’s voter registration list. For example, the Secretary receives monthly reports of: deceased adults from the Florida Department of Health; persons adjudicated mentally incompetent from each clerk of the circuit court; and persons who have become licensed to drive in other states from DHSMV. The Secretary also receives information from the United States Social Security Administration about registered voters who are deceased. And the Florida Department of Law Enforcement identifies persons on the voter rolls who have been convicted of a felony. See generally §§ 98.075, 98.093, Fla. Stat.
In 2011, as authorized by state law and mandated by HAVA, the Secretary worked with DHSMV to locate records in MDAVE pertaining to registered voters. This data matching produced DHSMV records of registered voters containing information preliminarily indicating that the individuals may be non-citizens, such as a foreign passport, green card, or U.S. visa. The Secretary distributed a small sample consisting of roughly 2,600 such names to county
7
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 8 of 25 PageID 64
supervisors, who were to provide the identified individuals notice and an opportunity to be heard. See Compl. ¶¶ 22–29.
In distributing the sample of names, the Secretary reminded supervisors: The list that you will be receiving represents only non-immigrants initially identified in DHSMV’s DAVE . . . . Please remember that you are still responsible for contacting these individuals and going through the process of verifying citizenship status before making a determination of eligibility for voter registration. You must follow the same procedures, in law, that you have in the past whenever you receive information that a registered voter of yours is ineligible to be registered to vote. Apr. 2, 2012 E-mail To County Supervisors (Ex. 3). Most county supervisors complied with their legal duty to “[n]otify the registered voter of his or her potential ineligibility by mail within 7 days.” § 98.075(7), Fla. Stat. Over 400 voters who were notified have confirmed their eligibility to vote. Since April 4, 2012, county supervisors of elections have removed over 100 registered voters from the voter rolls after determining that those persons were non-citizens. Many of these individuals had a record of voting in prior elections. The Secretary is not aware of, and Plaintiffs do not identify, any citizen appearing on the 2,600-person sample who has been wrongfully removed from the voter registration rolls, or any individual who was removed without a supervisor complying with the notice-and-hearing procedure and determining by a preponderance of the evidence that the individual was ineligible. See Compl. ¶¶ 44, 47, 50. The Secretary determined that use of more recent citizenship information contained in SAVE would facilitate more efficient identification of non-citizens registered to vote. Thus, on April 30, 2012, the Secretary decided not to forward any more MDAVE data to county supervisors. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ. After DHS repeatedly and illegally denied the Secretary access to SAVE data, the Secretary filed suit seeking immediate access to that data on
8
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 9 of 25 PageID 65
June 11, 2012. See Fla. Dep’t of State v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, No. 1:12-CV-00960 (D.D.C.).
B. Plaintiffs’ Complaint Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on June 8, 2012, more than one month after the Secretary discontinued the MDAVE data matching. Plaintiffs allege to be residents of Hillsborough County and a non-profit organization. See Compl. ¶¶ 43–53. Plaintiffs recognize that the State is not a covered jurisdiction under Section 5 and that only five of Florida’s 67 counties—Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe—are covered jurisdictions. Id. ¶¶ 41, 55. Plaintiffs nonetheless have sued and sought relief against only the Secretary, in his official capacity on behalf of the State, and have not sued any covered jurisdiction. See id. ¶ 15. Plaintiffs acknowledge that “Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in that state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America.” Id. ¶ 16. Plaintiffs do not challenge this citizenship requirement or allege that the Secretary’s data matching changed the qualifications for voter eligibility. Plaintiffs, moreover, do not mention the notice-and-hearing procedure that Florida law requires to remove an ineligible individual from the voter registration list, and make no allegation that the Secretary or any other Florida official sought to change those requirements. The gravamen of Plaintiffs’ sole claim, therefore, is that the Secretary’s “institut[ion] [of] voter list maintenance procedures based upon motor vehicles data matching constitute[s] [a] change[] affecting voting that require[s] Section 5 preclearance.” Id. ¶ 40. Yet Plaintiffs recognize that Florida law requires supervisors to “conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance” and the Secretary to “ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” Id. ¶ 17. At the same time, Plaintiffs fail to make even a
9
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 10 of 25 PageID 66
single reference to HAVA or to precleared state law’s express authorization to the Secretary to obtain information from state or federal agencies in order to confirm voter eligibility. See id.
Plaintiffs contend that the MDAVE data matching is “void” and seek a statewide injunction prohibiting the Secretary from engaging in the discontinued MDAVE data matching and ordering him “to direct all county Supervisors of Elections to cease” using that data. Id. ¶¶ 56–59, B. Plaintiffs point out that the Justice Department took the view, in a letter to the Secretary, that the MDAVE data matching was a change requiring preclearance under Section 5. Id. ¶ 34. However, the Justice Department filed its own suit challenging the MDAVE data matching on June 11, 2012. See Complaint, United States v. State of Florida, No. 4-12-CV-285 (N.D. Fla.) (Ex. 4). The Justice Department’s complaint alleged that the MDAVE data matching violated the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, but abandoned any allegation or claim that it was a change subject to Section 5 preclearance. See id. The Northern District of Florida has denied the Justice Department’s motion for a temporary restraining order in that case. See DOJ Order.
ARGUMENT I. SECTION 5 DOES NOT PROVIDE A CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE
STATE Section 5 requires preclearance “only to the extent” that the change in voting practice or procedure “affects voting in jurisdictions properly designated for coverage.” Lopez v. Monterey Cnty., 525 U.S. 266, 284–86 (1999) (“Lopez II”) (emphasis added); see also 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a); Holder v. Hall, 512 U.S. 874, 883(1994) (plurality op.) (“Section 5 applies only in certain jurisdictions specified by Congress.”); LaRouche v. Fowler, 77 F. Supp. 2d 80, 86 (D. D.C. 1999) (three-judge court), aff’d, 529 U.S. 1035 (2000). In other words, Section 5 extends only to those “jurisdiction[s] covered by section 4(b) of the [Voting Rights] Act.” 28 C.F.R. §
10
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 11 of 25 PageID 67
51.1(a). Section 5, therefore, obviously does not apply to a non-covered jurisdiction; such jurisdictions therefore are free to make changes in voting practice or procedure without first obtaining preclearance. Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 284.
Thus, Section 5 may be enforced—and provides a cause of action—only against a covered jurisdiction, not a non-covered jurisdiction. See, e.g., Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U.S. 544 (1969) (actions against officers of covered states of Mississippi and Virginia); Presley v. Etowah Cnty. Comm’n, 502 U.S. 491 (1992) (action against commission of covered political subdivision); Young v. Fordice, 520 U.S. 273 (1997) (action against officer of covered state of Mississippi); Lopez II, 525 U.S. 266 (action against covered political subdivision). This rule applies even where a non-covered state, by state law, enacts changes to voting practices or procedures to be implemented by a covered political subdivision. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 274–77. In that scenario, Section 5 provides no claim against the non-covered state, which participates in the litigation, if at all, as an intervenor. See, e.g., id. at 274 (noting non-covered state’s intervention in Section 5 suit against covered county).
As Plaintiffs acknowledge, the State of Florida is not a Section 5 covered jurisdiction, and the Secretary of State is “the chief election officer of Florida.” Compl. ¶ 15; see also id. ¶¶ 41, 55; 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix. Section 5 therefore provides no cause of action against the State. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77. In fact, as Plaintiffs also acknowledge, only five of Florida’s 67 counties are covered jurisdictions. See id. ¶¶ 41, 55; see also 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix. Thus, Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim runs, if at all, only against those counties. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77; see also Allen, 393 U.S. 544; Presley, 502 U.S. 491; Young, 520 U.S. 273. Yet Plaintiffs assert their Section 5 claim only against the Secretary in his official capacity
11
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 12 of 25 PageID 68
on behalf of the State. See Compl. ¶ 15. Plaintiffs thus have failed to state a valid claim upon which this Court can grant relief, and their Complaint should be dismissed.
Plaintiffs’ allegation that the Secretary “is required to provide written direction and opinions to the Supervisor of Elections on the performance of their official duties,” id., does not cure this pleading failure. A state legislature also provides direction, in the form of binding state law, to county election officials—yet such state laws do not transform a non-covered state into a covered jurisdiction against which a Section 5 claim may be brought. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77. Moreover, a County “Supervisor of Elections is a constitutional officer who operates not entirely within the Secretary’s control.” DOJ Order at 2. Thus, Plaintiffs’ choice to sue only the Secretary and failure to join any covered jurisdiction is doubly fatal, and the Court should dismiss the Complaint. II. THE SECRETARY DISCONTINUED THE MDAVE DATA MATCHING MORE
THAN ONE MONTH BEFORE PLAINTIFFS FILED SUIT The Secretary’s “voluntar[y] abandon[ment]” of the MDAVE data matching more than one month before Plaintiffs filed suit (DOJ Order at 1; see also id. at 10–11; June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ) defeats Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim for at least two reasons. First, this discontinuance of reliance on MDAVE data matching eliminates any “case or controversy” that can be adjudicated by a federal court. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 101 (1983). Indeed, this pre-suit voluntary abandonment eliminates any basis for Plaintiffs to plead, much less prove, standing to pursue their claim for prospective relief, because they are not “in danger of sustaining some direct injury as the result of the challenged conduct,” much less an injury that is “both real and immediate.” Id. at 102 (citation and quotation marks omitted). Moreover, even if Plaintiffs had standing to pursue a claim for a “conjectural or hypothetical” injury, id. (citation and quotation marks omitted), the discontinuance of MDAVE
12
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 13 of 25 PageID 69
data matching moots Plaintiffs’ claim in its entirety. The Eleventh Circuit has consistently held, even with respect to post-litigation voluntary cessation, that a challenge to government action “that has been unambiguously terminated will be moot in the absence of some reasonable basis to believe that the [action] will be reinstated if the suit is terminated.” Bankshot Billiards, Inc. v. City of Ocala, 634 F.3d 1340, 1352 (11th Cir. 2011). There is no question that the Secretary has “unambiguously terminated” the MDAVE data matching, id., as his own public pronouncements make clear. See, e.g., DOJ Order at 10–11; June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ. Moreover, there is no basis, reasonable or otherwise, to believe that the Secretary will reinstate the MDAVE data matching because the Secretary now seeks—and has filed suit to secure—the SAVE data withheld by the Department of Homeland Security. Indeed, the Secretary’s voluntary abandonment of the MDAVE data matching with no reasonable basis to suspect reinstatement was one of the principal reasons that the Northern District of Florida denied the Justice Department’s motion for a temporary restraining order. See DOJ Order at 10–11.
Second, Section 5 applies only where a covered jurisdiction “enact[s] or seek[s] to administer” a change in voting practice or procedure. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a); see also Lopez v. Monterey Cnty., 519 U.S. 9, 11 (1996) (“Lopez I”). Yet the Secretary’s voluntary abandonment demonstrates that neither the Secretary nor, more importantly, any covered county currently seeks to administer the MDAVE data matching that Plaintiffs challenge. Section 5 thus has no application here, and the Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint for this reason alone. III. THE SECRETARY’S DATA MATCHING IS NOT A CHANGE REQUIRING
SECTION 5 PRECLEARANCE Even if Plaintiffs had a Section 5 cause of action against the non-covered State concerning the no-longer-used MDAVE data, the Court still should dismiss the Complaint because the Secretary’s use of a new source of information to confirm voter eligibility, whether
13
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 14 of 25 PageID 70
MDAVE, SAVE, or some other source, is not a change subject to preclearance. By its express terms, Section 5 requires preclearance only where a covered jurisdiction “enact[s] or seek[s] to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from” one that already has been precleared. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a) (emphasis added). Section 5 thus extends “only to proposed changes in voting procedures,” Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130, 138 (1976) (emphasis added), resulting in a “new voting practice,” Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 20 (emphasis added), that retrogresses the exercise of “the right to vote” of “any citizens of the United States,” 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(b) (emphasis added); see also Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 11 (“Section 5 governs changes in voting procedures, with the purpose of preventing jurisdictions covered by its requirements from enacting or seeking to administer voting changes that have a discriminatory purpose or effect.” (emphases added)).
Here, the “voting qualification” is the obvious one of citizenship and the long-standing “standard, practice or procedure” is enforcing this qualification by excluding non-citizens from the voting rolls. 42 U.S.C. 1973c(a). This basic practice—universally followed and mandated by federal law—is hardly new or a change from prior practice. The fact that the counties are now provided with information on citizenship that is derived from a different source than their prior information does not remotely “change” either the citizenship “qualification” or the longstanding “practice” of inquiring into a registered voter’s citizenship status when there is reason to do so.
Thus, Plaintiffs’ theory that the Secretary or the counties need to seek Section 5 preclearance whenever they rely on a new source of information to enforce the unquestionably valid voter eligibility requirements is flawed on multiple levels. In the first place, even for the non-covered State, merely changing the information relied upon to confirm compliance with
14
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 15 of 25 PageID 71
valid voter eligibility requirements is not a change. Moreover, the Secretary’s data matching is assuredly not a change in how Florida’s covered counties “administer” voting procedures, because, on Plaintiffs’ own allegations, the counties are simply continuing to enforce Florida’s valid voter eligibility requirements through the precleared notice-and-hearing procedure. Finally, Plaintiffs’ Section 5 theory is incompatible with the mandate of HAVA, which requires the Secretary to match voter registration data against motor vehicle data. Because there has been no “change[] in voting procedure” anywhere, Beer, 425 U.S. at 138, Section 5 is inapplicable and Plaintiffs’ Complaint should be dismissed.
A. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change In Voting Practice Or Procedure
“In order to determine whether an election practice constitutes a ‘change’ as that term is defined in . . . § 5,” a court must “compare the practice with the covered jurisdiction’s ‘baseline.’” Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 421 (2008). The “baseline” is “the most recent practice that was both precleared and ‘in force or effect’—or, absent any change since the jurisdiction’s coverage date, the practice that was ‘in force or effect’ on that date.” Id. “The question is whether the [covered jurisdiction] has enacted or is seeking to administer a practice or procedure that is different enough from the baseline to qualify as a change.” Id.
The Supreme Court applied this change requirement in Presley v. Etowah County Commission, 502 U.S. 491 (1992). There, a group of plaintiffs brought suit alleging that certain changes in county governance were subject to, but had not properly received, Section 5 preclearance. See id. at 493–95. Specifically, the plaintiffs challenged a county resolution and a state law that altered the authority and duties of various county officials, contending that these changes related to voting and had a potentially retrogressive effect on minority voters. See id. at 495–499.
15
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 16 of 25 PageID 72
The Supreme Court rejected that contention. See id. at 510. The Supreme Court pointed out that its prior cases had identified “four factual contexts” triggering Section 5’s preclearance requirement: where changes in the covered jurisdiction (i) “involve[] the manner of voting,” (ii) “involve[] candidacy requirements and qualifications,” (iii) “concern[] . . . the composition of the electorate,” or (iv) “affect[] the creation or abolition of an elective office.” Id. at 502–03. The changes in county officials’ authority, the Supreme Court reasoned, did not fall within any of these categories because “[t]hey had no impact on the substantive question whether a particular office would be elective or the procedural question how an election would be conducted.” Id. at 510.
The Southern District of Texas recently applied Presley to reject a Section 5 challenge substantially similar to the one Plaintiffs advance. See Lopez v. City of Houston, No. H-09-0420, 2009 WL 1456487 (S.D. Tex. 2009), aff’d 617 F.3d 336 (5th Cir. 2010). The City of Houston Charter provided for a fourteen-member City Council, and required addition of two seats “if a determination [was] made pursuant to the Charter that the population of Houston is greater than or equal to 2.1 million people.” Id. at *1. The plaintiffs in Lopez brought suit alleging that, even though the City Controller had determined, pursuant to the Charter, that the City’s population exceeded 2.1 million people, the City Council had relied on nine year-old Census data to conclude that the City’s population remained below that threshold and, thus, that no new seats should be created. See id. The plaintiffs claimed that the City Council’s reliance on old Census data, rather than more recent population estimates, was a “change” in voting procedure requiring Section 5 preclearance. See id.
The Southern District of Texas rejected that claim for two reasons. First, the court held that the plaintiffs had failed to establish a “change” in procedure at all. See id. at *7–*8. The
16
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 17 of 25 PageID 73
plaintiffs pointed to various provisions of the City Charter related to the population determination—but they failed to identify the City “baseline” procedure for calculating population growth. See id. at *8. Because “[t]he plaintiffs have failed to allege that the City . . . has ever actually implemented or followed the standard that they assert is the baseline,” they could not prove that the City’s population determination was a “change” requiring preclearance. Id.
Second, the court held that, even if the City’s approach constituted a “change,” the plaintiffs still failed to state a claim because “merely changing the information relied upon or changing the procedure for determining whether a change in the size of the City Council is required is not the type of change that is subject to § 5’s preclearance requirements.” Id. at *9 (emphasis added). The court reasoned that such a change did not “fit within any of the four categories of covered changes listed in Presley” because it did “not even arguably relate to the manner of voting or candidacy requirements.” Id. And even though “[e]xpanding the number of council positions would clearly fit within the fourth [Presley] category” and “redistricting” the council districts “would fit within the third category,” changing the information relied on “to determine when the expansion of the Council and concomitant redistricting must be implemented does not have the requisite ‘direct relation to voting and the election process’ to be subject to Section 5 preclearance.” Id. (quoting Presley, 502 U.S. at 503).
1. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change For The NonCovered State
Even if the State were a covered jurisdiction, the Secretary’s data matching does not qualify as a “change” subject to Section 5 preclearance because it does not depart from the State’s precleared benchmark and, in any event, has no “direct relation to voting and the election process.” Presley, 502 U.S. at 503. First, the Secretary’s data matching “[m]erely chang[es] the
17
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 18 of 25 PageID 74
information relied upon” to comply with the governing state statutes, Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9, which require determination of who on the voter registration list might be an ineligible non-citizen and, thus, subject to removal after notice and a hearing, see § 97.041(1)(a)(2), Fla. Stat.; id. § 98.075(7).
As Plaintiffs recognize, Florida law limits the right to vote to citizens and requires the Secretary and supervisors to “conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance” and to “ensure maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” Compl. ¶¶ 16–17. Moreover, section 98.075 requires the Secretary to “protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” § 98.075(1), Fla. Stat. It further provides that if the Secretary or a county supervisor “receives information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” the supervisor is to remove the voter from the statewide voter rolls in compliance with the statutory notice and hearing procedure. §§ 98.075(6), (7) Fla. Stat. And Section 98.093 authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records.” § 98.093, Fla. Stat. All of these provisions have been precleared under Section 5. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ; A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida.
The Secretary long has implemented this statutory authority to obtain information bearing on voter eligibility from state and federal agencies and to transmit that information to county supervisors. The relevant precleared statutes specifically reference non-citizenship, along with out-of-state residence, mental incapacity, and felony convictions, as bases for removing ineligible individuals from the voter registration list. See generally § 98.075, Fla. Stat. Moreover, the relevant precleared statute specifically authorizes the Secretary and supervisors of
18
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 19 of 25 PageID 75
elections to receive information regarding voter ineligibility from new sources and to act on that information by following the statutory notice-and-hearing procedure. See id. § 98.075(6) (referring generally to “information from sources other than those identified in subsections (2) – (5)”). MDAVE and SAVE data matching are nothing more than the use of newly available sources of information to carry out the Secretary’s statutory duty to verify voter eligibility and to maintain the voter registration list. See id.; see also id. § 98.093. Such a legally authorized effort is not a “change” to procedure at all, much less a change requiring preclearance. Beer, 425 U.S. at 138.
Indeed, under Plaintiffs’ theory, any time the Secretary obtained information bearing on voter eligibility from a new source—whether a new government database, a newspaper article or internet report, or a tip from a private citizen—he would be required to obtain preclearance before providing that information to a county supervisor. This, of course, is not the law, see Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9, and directly contravenes the Secretary’s precleared authorization to act on any “information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen.” § 98.075(6), Fla. Stat.
And this theory makes no sense because it would hamstring local authorities into using antiquated, unreliable sources of information to implement precleared voting practices and procedures unless and until it received preclearance to use new, more reliable sources of information. Such a freezing of local authorities would impede, rather than advance, the efficient discharge of precleared election laws. Indeed, creating such headwinds to excluding ineligible persons impedes Section 5’s substantive goals because it diminishes the voting power of “citizens”—minority and nonminority—that is protected by Section 5. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(b).
19
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 20 of 25 PageID 76
As this reflects, the reason the Secretary has sought MDAVE and SAVE data is that each was more accurate than the previously available data, and thus would reduce the number of “false positives” and the potential for ad hoc, subjective enforcement of the citizenship qualification. See Compl. ¶ 32. On Plaintiffs’ construction, however, Section 5 would prevent the State from using more reliable data to assess citizenship. See id.
Second, the Secretary’s data matching does not fit within any of the four Presley categories and, thus, does not have the “direct relation to voting and the election process” required to trigger Section 5.1 Presley, 502 U.S. at 503. On its face, the Secretary’s data matching did not “involve[] the manner of voting” or “candidacy requirements and qualifications,” and did not “affect[] the creation or abolition of an elective office.” Id. at 502– 03. And while changing the qualifications for voter eligibility affects “the composition of the electorate,” id. at 503, “[m]erely changing the information relied upon” to determine compliance with existing qualifications does not, Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9 (emphasis added). Plaintiffs concede as much because they do not allege that every administrative determination of ineligibility under Section 98.075(7) is itself subject to preclearance. Thus, the Secretary’s data matching “had no impact on the . . . procedural question how an election would be conducted,” Presley, 502 at 510, and did “not even arguably relate to the manner of voting or candidacy requirements,” Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9. The Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
1 While the Supreme Court in Allen gave “a broad interpretation to the right to vote,” the Secretary’s data matching does not trigger Section 5 even under that construction because it does not “alter[] the election law of a covered jurisdiction,” relate to “the qualification of candidates or to state decisions as to which offices shall be elective,” 393 U.S. at 564–66, or, as discussed infra, fit within any of the four Presley categories.
20
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 21 of 25 PageID 77
2. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change In Any Covered County
Regardless of whether the Secretary’s data matching is a change on the non-covered state level, it is not a change to the “baseline” practice in any covered county. Riley, 553 U.S. at 421. For starters, Plaintiffs apparently agree that no covered county has implemented a change because they have not joined any such jurisdiction as a defendant in this case. See Compl. ¶ 15. Moreover, Plaintiffs do not allege that any covered county has changed the qualifications for voter eligibility or the notice-and-hearing procedure for removing an ineligible individual from the voter registration list. See Compl. ¶ 31.
Instead, the only action by a covered jurisdiction that Plaintiffs identify is Hillsborough County’s use of the Secretary’s data matching “as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship.” Id. But as Plaintiffs themselves recognize, that mailing comported with the baseline procedure in precleared “Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7),” which details the notice-and-hearing requirement for removing an ineligible person. Id. Indeed, nothing has changed for the county supervisors in the covered jurisdictions, which, even on Plaintiffs’ theory, simply have implemented their baseline duty to initiate proceedings to remove “a registered voter” whenever they “receive[] information . . . that [he or she] is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen.” § 98.075(6), Fla. Stat.; Compl. ¶ 31; see also Riley, 553 U.S. at 421; Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *8. Because no covered county has effected any “change[] in voting procedures,” Beer, 425 U.S. at 138 (emphasis added), the Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
B. HAVA Imposes A Non-Discretionary Duty On The Secretary To Match MDAVE Data
Plaintiffs’ theory that the Secretary’s data matching is a Section 5 change also contravenes HAVA’s imposition of a non-discretionary duty to conduct such matching. It is
21
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 22 of 25 PageID 78
axiomatic that a covered jurisdiction need not obtain preclearance of its compliance with federal “mandates.” Young, 520 U.S. at 286. This rule makes perfect sense: Congress is plainly aware of Section 5 and “retains the authority to curtail the Act’s protections with subsequent legislation; alternatively, Congress may be assumed to have accounted for the policies underlying the Act in rendering the new law.” Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 285.
Here, HAVA requires the Secretary to match MDAVE data as part of his duty to verify voter eligibility. HAVA generally requires the Secretary “to ensure that voter registration records in the State are accurate and are updated regularly” in order to “remove registrants who are ineligible to vote from the official list of eligible voters.” 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(4). HAVA also directs the Secretary to “match information in the database of the statewide voter registration system with information in the database of the [State’s] motor vehicle authority” in order “to verify the accuracy” of voter registration information. Id. § 15483(a)(5)(B)(i). The Secretary’s data matching was precisely the kind of voter information verification that Congress envisioned in enacting HAVA—so it cannot possibly be void merely because the Secretary, on behalf of the non-covered State, did not obtain Section 5 preclearance. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 285; Young, 520 U.S. at 276. For this reason as well, Plaintiffs’ Complaint should be dismissed. IV. PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR STATEWIDE RELIEF SHOULD BE DISMISSED
Finally, in the alternative, and at a minimum, the Court should reject Plaintiffs’ attempt to expand an alleged Section 5 violation in five Florida counties into a statewide injunction prohibiting the Secretary from implementing data matching and “ordering [him] to employ his full authority to direct all county Supervisors of Elections to cease” using the matched MDAVE data. Compl. ¶¶ B–C (emphasis added). Because Section 5 provides a cause of action against only covered jurisdictions, see supra Part I, it authorizes relief only against those jurisdictions.
22
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 23 of 25 PageID 79
Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 284–86. Section 5, therefore, does not authorize relief “to the extent” that an alleged change in voting practice or procedure affects a non-covered jurisdiction. Id. at 284. Indeed, a judicial extension of Section 5 to non-covered jurisdictions—jurisdictions for which Congress has developed no record and made no findings that would justify the extraordinary prophylactic remedy of preclearance—would likely be unconstitutional. Nw. Austin Mun. Utility Water Dist. v. Holder, 129 S.Ct. 2504, 2511-12 (2009). Thus, even if Plaintiffs could establish that the Secretary’s data matching pursuant to precleared state law and a federal mandate were a “change” requiring preclearance—which they cannot—they would not be entitled to any relief in the 62 non-covered counties. At a minimum, the Court should dismiss all such requests for relief.2
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
2 Moreover, because Plaintiffs allege to be residents of Hillsborough County (see Compl. ¶¶ 44, 48, 52), they suffer no harm from the Secretary’s data matching in any other county and, thus, lack standing to challenge it. See, e.g., Sullivan v. Scott, No. 11-10047, 2011 WL 4954261 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2011) (dismissing statewide Section 5 claim); see generally Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992); Lyons, 461 U.S. at 101–02.
23
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 24 of 25 PageID 80

Dated: July 13, 2012

Respectfully submitted,

Michael A. Carvin (D.C. Bar No. 366784) John M. Gore (D.C. Bar No. 502057) JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Telephone: (202) 879-3939 Facsimile: (202) 626-1700 macarvin@jonesday.com jmgore@jonesday.com

/s/ Daniel E. Nordby Daniel E. Nordby (Fla. Bar No. 14588) General Counsel Ashley E. Davis (Fla. Bar No. 48032) Assistant General Counsel Florida Department Of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street, Suite 100 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6536 Facsimile: (850) 245-6127 Daniel.Nordby@DOS.MyFlorida.com Ashley.Davis@DOS.MyFlorida.com

Counsel for Defendant Secretary of State Ken Detzner

24
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16 Filed 07/13/12 Page 25 of 25 PageID 81 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 13th day of July, 2012, a true and correct copy of the foregoing will be sent electronically to the registered participants through the Court’s CM/ECF system.
/s/ Daniel E. Nordby
25
WAI-3079624v1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-1 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID 82
EXHIBIT 1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-1 Filed 07/13/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID 83

RICK SCOTT Governor

of fLORIDA DEPARTMENT STAT~ 


KENDETZNER Secretary of State

June 6, 2012

T. Christian Herren United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Voting Section - NWB 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, D.C. 20530

Re: Florida's Continuing Commitment to Protecting Citizen Voting Rights

Dear Mr. Herren:

I write in response to your letter of May 31, 2012, which questions the Florida Department of State's ongoing efforts to protect the integrity of elections and to maintain current and accurate voter registration rolls. Your letter suggests that the Department of Justice (DOJ) opposes these efforts, and reads federal law to prohibit Florida from verifying the eligibility of registered voters and removing non-citizens from its voter rolls. The Department of State respectfully disagrees with DOJ's position. The actions taken by Florida to identify and remove non-citizens from its voter rolls ensure that the right to vote of citizens is protected and is not diluted by the votes of ineligible persons.

For nine months, Florida has sought access to the best available information to ensure the accuracy of our voter registration rolls: the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Because DHS has repeatedly blocked Florida's access, we have been unable to send additional information to supervisors of elections since April 30, 2012. We continue to wait for access to the most current information available, and we respectfully reiterate our request for immediate access to the SAVE database.

At the outset, it is important to note that the process initiated by the Florida Department of State has identified registered voters who, by their own admission, are not United States citizens. These ineligible persons have been appropriately removed from the voter rolls. Pursuant to Florida law, no person has been or will be removed from the voter rolls without the fundamentals of due process: notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a determination by the county supervisor of elections that a preponderance of the evidence shows the voter is ineligible.

~
VIVA FlORIDA500.

R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 
 Telephone: (850) 245-6500 • Facsimile: (850) 245-6125 www.dos.state.t1.us
 Commemorating 500 years ofFlorida history www.t1a500.com

~
.
VIVA flORIDA 500.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-1 Filed 07/13/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID 84
Under section 98.075, Florida Statutes, a law which has been duly precleared by the Department of Justice, a supervisor of elections must take the following actions before any person's name may be removed from the statewide voter registration system:
• Notify the registered voter of his or her potential ineligibility by certified mail, return receipt requested, including any documentation upon which the potential ineligibility is based;
• Allow the registered voter 30 days to respond by admitting or denying the ac=acy of the information underlying the potential ineligibility;
• Provide the registered voter a hearing, if requested, for the purpose of determining eligibility;
• If the mailed notice is returned as undeliverable, puhlish notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the voter was last registered, with an additional 30-day opportunity for the registered voter to resolve the matter;
• At the conclusion of the notice and hearing process, make a final determination of the voter's eligibility based on a preponderance of the evidence before the supervisor of elections;
• Allow for an additional appeal of any determination of ineligibility before a state circuit court.
Other duly-precleared Florida laws provide additional safeguards to protect the rights of lawfully registered voters. See § 98.081(2), Fla. Stat. (providing for restoration of any voter erroneously removed from the statewide voter registration system); § 101.048, Fla. Stat. (allowing any voter whose eligibility cannot be determined to vote a provisional baUot).
As explained below, Florida's implementation of these state statutes is fully consistent with federal law.
The Voting Rights Act
Florida's actions are consistent with the Voting Rights Act. The State of Florida is not a covered jurisdiction subject to the preclearance requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. As for the role of the supervisors of elections in Florida's five covered counties, they are simply administering a law that the Department of Justice has duly precleared. See § 98.075, Fla. Stat.
The National Voter Registration Act
Florida's actions are also consistent with the National Voter Registration Act. oars reading of the NVRA would grant greater protection against removal from the voter rolls to non­ citizens-who were never eligible to vote--than to other categories of registered voters (such as deceased persons, convicted felons, and the mentally incompetent) who may have lawfully been on the rolls at one time but have later become ineligible. Such a result is plainly contrary to the NVRA's express purpose of "ensur[ing] that accurate and current voter registration rolls are maintained." 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg(h)(4).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-1 Filed 07/13/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID 85
If the effect of the NVRA is to force a state to allow never-eligible non-citizens the opportunity to vote, then the statute might violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, which guarantees that the right to vote cannot be denied by a dilution of the weight of a citizen's vote. If DO] applies the NVRA in this manner, then presumably eligible voters in Florida have the right to bring a lawsuit in federal court to test whether their votes are being unconstitutionally denied by the federal government.
Your letter suggests that Florida's efforts to identifY and remove non-citizens who have illegally registered to vote violate the NVRA because we are now within ninety days of a federal election. Even if the ninety-day provision were read to provide for this result-that is, prohibiting a state from removing non-citizens from the voter rolls three months prior to a federal election-nothing in the NVRA would prohibit Florida from simply gathering information about persons who have illegally registered. That information, even if not used to remove improperly-registered persons now, could be used after a federal election to remove those persons from the rolls or to prosecute them if they illegally voted.
Finally, even assuming the ~'VRA' s ninety-day provision applies to the type of individualized assessment at issue here, Florida has entered that period only because DHS has repeatedly ignored or rebuffed Florida's efforts to gain access to the SAVE database-access that was necessary for successful and accurate completion of Florida' s efforts to ensure the integrity of its voter registration rolls. For your reference, I have attached to this letter a chain of emails dating back nine months, which demonstrates DHS's refusals and delays in this regard.
By denying Florida access to the SAVE database, DHS appears to have violated federal law, which provides that states may use the SAVE database "for any legal purpose such as ... voter registration," and that DHS "shall respond to an inquiry by a .. . State . .. government agency ... seeking to verifY or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information." 76 Fed. Reg. 58525, 58527 (Sept. 21, 2011); 7 U.S.C. § 1373(d).
In sum, the practice DOJ now appears to be endorsing is as follows: the federal Department of Homeland Security may, for months, violate federal law and deny Florida and other states access to the SAVE database so that the federal Department of Justice may then assert that the resulting delays in a state's election-integrity efforts violate the time periods established in another federal law. This hardly seems like an approach earnestly designed to protect the integrity of elections and to ensure that eligible voters have their votes counted.
Conclusion
It is an unfortunate but now undeniable fact that Florida' s voter rolls include individuals who are not citizens of the United States. The Florida Department of State has a solemn obligation to ensure the integrity of elections in this State. Permitting ineligible, non-citizen voters to cast ballots undermines that mission and erodes the justified faith the electorate has in the fairness and reliability of the electoral process. To enable the Department of State to meet its

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-1 Filed 07/13/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID 86
responsibility to enforce both federal and state law, and to determine what further action may be necessary, please provide us with answers to the following questions by June 11 :
(I) Does the DO] agree that the Department of Homeland Security has a legal obligation to provide Florida access to the SAVE database?
(2) Is it the DO]'s position that the NVRA prohibits any actions by Florida to identify and remove non-citizens from its voter registration rolls between today' s date and the date of the November 6 General Election?
(3) If not, what steps does the DO] believe Florida may take to identify and remove non­ citizens from its voter registration rolls between today's date and the date of the November 6 General Election?
(4) If the DOl's position is that the NVRA prohibits Florida from removing non-citizens from its voter registration rolls between today's date and the date of the November 6 General Election, is it the DOl's position that the NVRA prohibits Florida from taking action to even identify non-citizens on its voter registration rolls for later removal and, if warranted by the facts and law, prosecution by appropriate law enforcement authorities?
Sincerely,
Ken Detzner Secretary of State
cc: Attorney General Pam Bondi Elise Sandra Shore, Esq.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-2 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID 87
EXHIBIT 2

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea2geof11o2f P11ageID 88
Page 1 of 11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CASE NO. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

STATE OF FLORIDA and KEN DETZNER, Secretary of State, in his official capacity,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

ORDER DENYING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

This case arises from a program that the Florida Secretary of State began and then voluntarily abandoned to identify and remove noncitizens from the Florida voter-registration rolls. The United States has sued the Secretary and the State of Florida, asserting violations of the National Voter Registration Act. The United States has moved for a temporary restraining order. In substance, the motion may seek a preliminary injunction, but the nomenclature makes no difference. This order confirms the ruling announced at greater length on the record at the conclusion of a hearing on the motion. The order denies the motion primarily because the Secretary has abandoned the program.
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea3geof21o2f P11ageID 89
Page 2 of 11
I The Secretary is Florida’s chief elections officer, but each county has its own Supervisor of Elections. A Supervisor of Elections is a constitutional officer who operates not entirely within the Secretary’s control. The Secretary compiled a list of roughly 180,000 registered voters who he said might be noncitizens. The Secretary sent a sample of names drawn from the list to the Supervisors with a detailed set of instructions—or at least suggestions— on how to use the list. The instructions included sending a letter to each person on the list directing the person to send back a form swearing, under penalty of perjury, that the person was or was not a citizen, and, if a citizen, either requesting a hearing or attaching documents showing citizenship. The proposed letter included a statement that if the person failed to respond within 30 days, the person might be removed from the voter roll. There were major flaws in the program. The Secretary compiled the list in a manner certain to include a large number of citizens. At least insofar as shown by this record, the list included any person who (1) as a noncitizen, obtained a driver’s license and accurately disclosed to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles that the person was not a citizen, (2) became a naturalized citizen, (3) registered to vote, accurately disclosing to the Supervisor of Elections that the
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea4geof31o2f P11ageID 90
Page 3 of 11
person was a citizen, and (4) had not yet renewed the driver’s license and so had
not updated DHSMV’s records to reflect the new citizenship status.
Florida driver’s licenses are renewed every six years. One thus would
expect the average lag between naturalization and driver’s-license renewal to be
three years. Tens of thousands of Florida residents become naturalized citizens
each year. Homeland Security records put the number at nearly 240,000 for the last three years.1 If just over three-fourths of those were already licensed drivers and, upon becoming citizens, registered to vote, one would expect the Secretary’s list to include 180,000 properly registered new citizens. And the Secretary’s
methodology had other possible flaws as well, including, for example, the possibility that the clerk issuing a driver’s license improperly listed a citizen as a
noncitizen; the record does not indicate whether a driver has an opportunity to
review or correct such an entry. The suggestion that there was a list of 180,000
improperly registered noncitizens was plainly wrong.
1 The numbers are 82,788 for 2009, and 67,484 for 2010, and 87,309 for 2011, for a total of 237,581. James Lee, Annual Flow Report: U.S. Naturalizations: 2011, Dep’t of Homeland Security 3 (April 2012), http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/us-naturalizations-2011.shtm. This appears to be information that can be judicially noticed. Taking notice would be proper only if the parties have an opportunity to be heard. See Fed. R. Evid. 201. But it makes no difference whether this information is judicially noticed or even considered at all. It is common knowledge than many thousands of Floridians are naturalized each year. At argument, the Secretary did not deny it, and nobody could reasonably do so. The numbers are set out here just to illustrate the point.
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea5geof41o2f P11ageID 91
Page 4 of 11
Still, the Supervisors who received the Secretary’s sample list identified a small number of noncitizens who were on the list and were registered to vote. The record is less than conclusive but suggests that some actually voted in past elections.
II In order to obtain a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, a plaintiff must establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, that it will suffer irreparable injury unless the injunction issues, that the threatened injury outweighs whatever damage the proposed injunction may cause a defendant, and that the injunction will not be adverse to the public interest. See, e.g., Siegel v. LePore, 234 F.3d 1163, 1176 (11th Cir. 2000) (en banc); Charles H. Wesley Educ. Found., Inc. v. Cox, 408 F.3d 1349, 1354 (11th Cir. 2005).
III In support of its motion, the United States asserts it is likely to prevail on the merits of two claims, both arising under the National Voter Registration Act. First, the United States says the NVRA prohibits a state from pursuing a program to systematically remove noncitizens from the voting rolls within 90 days before a federal election. And second, the United States says the Secretary’s program violates the NVRA’s requirement that any such program be uniform and nondiscriminatory.
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea6geof51o2f P11ageID 92
Page 5 of 11
A The United States bases its 90-day argument on NVRA section 8(c)(2)(A): A State shall complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(c)(2)(A). Section 8(c)(2)(B) sets out exceptions: Subparagraph (A) shall not be construed to preclude—
(i) the removal of names from official lists of voters on a basis described in paragraph (3)(A) or (B) or (4)(A) of subsection (a) of this section; or (ii) correction of registration records pursuant to this subchapter. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(c)(2)(B). It is unclear why the exception in clause (ii) does not apply to the Secretary’s program, but neither side says it does. The exceptions in clause (i) do not apply here; they deal with removal of an individual who requests removal, or has a felony conviction or mental incapacity, or has died. Thus paragraph (a)(3) deals with removal of names from the voter list: (A) at the request of the registrant; (B) as provided by State law, by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity; or (C) as provided under paragraph (4) . . . . 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(3). Paragraph (a)(4)(A) in turn deals with removal on one additional ground:
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea7geof61o2f P11ageID 93
Page 6 of 11
(A) the death of the registrant . . . . 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(4). The Secretary says subparagraph (a)(3)(B) allows removal on any ground “provided by State law,” but that plainly is incorrect, first because that reading would render the rest of paragraph (a)(3)—and also section 8(c)(2)(A)—virtually superfluous, and second because in the vertical list with separate entries separately numbered and separated by semicolons, each separately numbered entry must be read as an integrated whole. The reference to removal “as provided by State law, by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity” thus means removal based on a criminal conviction or mental incapacity—but only to the extent state law provides for removal on those grounds. The suggestion that two wholly unrelated grounds for removal—“as provided by state law” and “by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity”—were set out in subparagraph (B), separated by a comma instead of a semicolon, is wrong.
The United States says the Secretary’s program is a “program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters,” that none of the listed exceptions applies to the removal of noncitizens, and that section 8(c)(2)(A) thus prohibits the Secretary from continuing his program into the 90-day quiet period. The quiet period began on May16, 2012, which was 90 days before the scheduled August 14, 2012 primary.
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea8geof71o2f P11ageID 94
Page 7 of 11
On first reading, section 8(c)(2)(A) seems to say precisely what the United States claims. But a parallel NVRA provision indicates that this first reading is incorrect. Section 8(a)(3) requires a state to provide that “the name of a registrant may not be removed from the official list of eligible voters” with the specific exceptions quoted in part above—exceptions for the registrant’s own request, criminal conviction or mental incapacity, death, or change of residence. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(3). On first reading, this section—which applies at all times, not just in the 90 days before an election—seems to prohibit a state from ever removing from its voting list a noncitizen, even though the noncitizen should never have been registered in the first place.
But this is not what this section means. Both sides agree that a state can remove an improperly registered noncitizen; the United States challenges only a state’s ability to do so as part of a systematic program during the 90-day quiet period. This conclusion is inescapable: section 8(a)(3)’s prohibition on removing a registrant except on specific grounds simply does not apply to an improperly registered noncitizen.
So section 8(a)(3)’s list of the grounds on which a “registrant” may be “removed” does not apply to removing an improperly registered noncitizen. Section 8(c)(2) provides a quiet period—90 days—during which a state cannot pursue a program to systematically “remove . . . ineligible voters.” Surely
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea9geof81o2f P11ageID 95
Page 8 of 11
“removed” in 8(a)(3) and “remove” in 8(c)(2) mean the same thing. And there is no reason to believe the reference to removing a “registrant” in 8(a)(3) means something different than removing “ineligible voters” in 8(c)(2); by definition, someone who is being “removed” has already registered, so an “ineligible voter” is a “registrant.” In short, if, as both sides concede, section 8(a)(3) does not prohibit a state from removing an improperly registered noncitizen, then 8(c)(2) does not prohibit a state from systematically removing improperly registered noncitizens during the quiet period.
This indicates that what Congress had in mind when it drafted these sections was removing a person on grounds that typically arise after an initial proper registration. Congress was not addressing the revocation of an improperly granted registration of a noncitizen. A person who was once properly registered can be removed from the voting list under section 8(a)(3) only for specific reasons: the person asks to be taken off the list, becomes ineligible under state law because of a criminal conviction or mental incapacity, dies, or changes residence. During the 90-day quiet period, a state may pursue a program to systematically remove registrants on request or based on a criminal conviction, mental incapacity, or death, but not based on a change of residence. What matters here is this: none of this applies to removing noncitizens who were not properly registered in the first place.
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-csve-041:1229-4c-vJ-D0W02-8M5A-RPH-DCoAcSumDeonct u1m6-e2nt 3F4iledFi0le7d/1036/1/228/1P2agPe a1g0eo9f 1o2f 1P1ageID 96
Page 9 of 11
For noncitizens, the state’s duty is to maintain an accurate voting list. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b). A state can and should do that on the front end, blocking a noncitizen from registering in the first place. And if a state finds it has made an error—or a number of errors—and wishes to correct the problem, it should do so well in advance. But the NVRA does not require a state to allow a noncitizen to vote just because the state did not catch the error more than 90 days in advance.
B The United States bases its second challenge on NVRA section 8(b), which requires a state program that is intended “to protect the integrity of the electoral process”—by providing an “accurate” voter roll—to be “uniform” and “nondiscriminatory.” 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b). The Secretary’s program, while he was pursuing it, probably ran afoul of this provision. The record indicates that the Secretary’s program identified many properly registered citizens as potential noncitizens. Given the methodology, that is hardly surprising. The Secretary’s proposal was to send letters to the listed individuals requiring a response and ultimately to require them to provide documentation of their citizenship. The Secretary’s methodology made it likely that the properly registered citizens who would be required to respond and provide documentation would be primarily newly naturalized citizens. The program was
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea1g1e o1f01o2f P11ageID 97
Page 10 of 11
likely to have a discriminatory impact on these new citizens. And while the Secretary suggests that having to respond to this kind of inquiry is of little import, that is not so. A state cannot properly impose burdensome demands in a discriminatory manner.
III The Secretary says, though, that he has suspended the program and will not resume it. He says he is seeking better information, specifically access to a database maintained by the United States Department of Homeland Security that, if used properly, should exclude from the Secretary’s list the newly naturalized citizens, and perhaps others included on the Secretary’s list in error. A program that accurately identifies noncitizens who are registered to vote without unnecessarily challenging citizens could meet the requirement of uniformity and nondiscrimination. And because, as set out above, such a program could be pursued even within 90 days of an election, there is no reason to believe, at this point, that the Secretary will engage in any future violation of the NVRA. There is no need for an injunction prohibiting the Secretary from continuing with a program he has unequivocally said he will not continue. Support for this conclusion comes from the four-part test governing preliminary injunctive relief, as set out above, including the requirement that any such injunction be necessary to avoid irreparable harm. And support also comes from the voluntary-cessation
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:1C2a-scev-40:11229-c4v-J-0D0W28-M5-ARPH-CDAoScumDeonctu1m6e-2nt 3F4ileFdil0e7d/1036//1228/1P2agPea1g2e o1f11o2f P11ageID 98
Page 11 of 11
doctrine as applied to public defendants. In this circuit a government entity that has discontinued challenged conduct enjoys a rebuttable presumption that the conduct will not recur. See, e.g., Bankshot Billiards, Inc. v. City of Ocala, 634 F.3d 1340, 1351-52 (11th Cir. 2011) (collecting earlier cases). If the Secretary or the supervisors of elections go forward with the program the Secretary says he has abandoned, the issue can be revisited.
IV For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED: The motion for a temporary restraining order, ECF No. 7, is DENIED. SO ORDERED on June 28, 2012.
s/Robert L. Hinkle United States District Judge
Case No. 4:12cv285-RH/CAS

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-3 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID 99
EXHIBIT 3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-3 Filed 07/13/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID 100

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-3 Filed 07/13/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID 101

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID 102
EXHIBIT 4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 2 of 10 PageID 103 Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 1 of 9

IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT FOR THE NORTIIERN DISTRlCT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

)

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

~

STATE OF FLORlDA; KEN DETZNER,

)

Secretary of State, in his official capacity,

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

---------------)

COMPLAINT

CIVIL ACTION NO.

The United States of America alleges:

1. The Attorney General brings this action on behalf of the United States to enforce

Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 ("NVRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg~6.

2. The State of Florida is conducting a program "the purpose of which is to

systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters,"

within 90 days of an election for Federal office. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(c)(2)(A). Section

8(c)(2)(A) of the NVRA expressly forbids such removal programs during the 90~day period

before an election for Federal office, with a few exceptions that do Dot apply here. The United

States brings this action to protect the rights of eligible citizens to vote and to ensure that the

State complies with the voter protections enacted by Congress through the NVRA.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1345,

& 2201, and 42 U.S.c. § 1973gg-9.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 3 of 10 PageID 104
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 2 of 9
2
4. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 89, 1391(b). PARTIES
5. The NVRA authorizes the Attorney General of the United States to bring a civil action on behalf of the Plaintiff United States of America in an appropriate district court for such declaratory or inj\Dlctive relief as is necessary to carry out the NVRA. 42 U.S.C. § I973gg-9(a).
6. Defendant State of Florida is one of the States ofthe United States of America and is subject to the requirements of the NVRA. 42 U.S.c. §§ 1973gg-1(4), 1973gg-2, 1973gg6.
7. Defendant Secretary of State Ken Detzner is sued in his official capacity as the chief state election official responsible for coordinating Florida's responsibilities under the
NVRA. See 42 U.S.c. § 1973gg-8; Fla. Stat. § 97.012(7). Defendant Detzner is the head of the
Florida Department of State. The Division of Elections is one of the divisions established within
the Department of State. See Fla. Stat. § 20.10(1) & (2)(a). CAUSE OF AcnON
8. Section 8 of the NVRA establishes requirements for how States maintain voter registration lists for elections for Federal office. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-6, 1973gg-1(1), 1(2).
9. . Among these requirements, Section 8(b)(1) of the NVRA provides that any State program or activity designed to ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration rolls for elections for Federal office "shall be Wliform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965[.]" 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b)(1).
10. Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the NVRA requires that "[a] State shall complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 4 of 10 PageID 105 Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 3 of 9
3
purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters." 42 U.S.C. § I 973gg-6(c)(2)(A).
11. Section 8(c)(2)(B) of the NVRA includes limited exceptions to the 90-day period established by Section 8(c)(2)(A). 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(c)(2)(B). Those exceptions authorize voter removal programs within 90 days of a primary or general election for Federal office only in the following circwnstances: (1) at the request of the registrant; (2) if the registrant is disqualified by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity as provided by State law; or (3) if the registrant has died. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-6(a)(3)(A), (a)(3)(B), (a)(4)(A), (c)(2)(B)(i). States may not otherwise conduct a systematic removal program under Section 8 of the NVRA within 90 days of an election for Federal office, including removing registrants within the 90-day period for failing to respond to letters sent as a result of a systematic list maintenance program.
12. The next-scheduled Florida primary election, which includes elections for Federal office, is set for August 14, 2012. See Florida Division of Elections, Calendar of Election Dates, available at http://election.dos.state.fl.uslcalendar/elecdate.shtmJ.
13. The 90th day before the August 14,2012 primary election was May 16,2012. ]4. The next-scheduled Florida general election, which includes elections for Federal office, is set for November 6, 2012. See Florida Division of Elections, Calendar of Election Dates, available at http://election.dos.state.fl.uslcalendar/elecdate.shtml; 2 U.S.C. § 7. 15. The 90th day before the November 6,2012 general election will be August 8, 2012, which falls before Florida's primary election. 16. Defendant Detzner has been working in coordination with the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV") to identify registered voters for possible removal from the statewide Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS"). As part of

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 5 of 10 PageID 106
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 4 of 9
4
this effort, Defendant Detzner has implemented ongoing procedures (1) to verify voter registration records in FVRS against databases maintained by DHSMV for purposes of identifying potentially ineligible voters based on lack of citizenship, and (2) to distribute the results of this matching process to the 67 Florida County Supervisors of Elections for further action, including possible removal of registered voters from the FVRS.
17. Upon information and belief, in early April 2012, the Florida Division of Elections ("DOE") sent to the 67 Florida County Supervisors of Elections a list of voters identified as potentially ineligible due to lack of citizenship. On April 23, 2012, the DOE sent to the Supervisors of Elections a PowerPoint document entitled "Processing Ineligible Registered Voter-Non-Immigrants." See Attachment 1. This document sets forth step-by-step instructions for the Supervisors of Elections to follow when verifying the eligibility of voters identified as a result of the matching process described in Paragraph 16. These instructions incorporate provisions of Fla. Stat. §§ 98.075(6) and (7), and also direct the Supervisors of Elections to "Conduct any additional research [Refer to whatever other sources you have to confirm identity and potential change in legal status. You should all have access to DHSMV's DAVE. If you find information credible and reliable, proceed.]" Id at 8 (brackets in original). "DAVE" (the Driver and Vehicle Express system) is a DHSMV database that contains driver's license information. The PowerPoint document also specifically instructs the Supervisors of Elections to "[d]etermine eligibility of person based on information you have ... if ineligible, remove voter name from rolls." ld. at 18.
18. Based on information and belief, on May 16, 2012, officials from the Florida Department of State, including from the DOE and the Department's Office of General Counse~ presented a training session in the form of a PowerPoint presentation entitled "List Maintenance

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 6 of 10 PageID 107
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 5 of 9
5
Categories and Procedures" to the Florida County Supervisors of Elections during the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections ("FSASE") annual conference. See Attaclunent 2. The PowerPoint training includes a '"workflow overview" diagram for what Florida described as the ''Non-US Citizens Project," which depicts an "automated match" between FVRS Registration Records and "Driver Licensee" (DHSMV) records. Id. at slide 11. The training then provides step-by-step instructions for the Supervisors of Elections to follow when verifying the eligibility of voters identified as a result of the matching process described in Paragraph 16. Id. at slides 17-23. The document specifically instructs the Supervisors of Elections to "[d]etermine eligibility of person based on jnformation you have ... [i]f ineligible, remove voter name from rolls." Id. at slide 23.
19. Based on information and belief, the database matching processes described in Paragraph 16 and incorporated into the procedures described in Attachment 1 and 2 rely on outdated and inaccurate data; consequently, the resulting lists have erroneously identified numerous registered voters in Florida who are U.s. citizens who are eligible to vote and who potentially could be deprived of their right to vote. See, e.g., Attachment 3 (May 31, 2012 Letter from Miami-Dade County Supervisor of Elections to Florida Department of State, at 2). The Defendants were aware that the resulting lists included errors and incorrect information.
20. Among the eligible voters erroneously identified as non-citizens by the Defendants are individuals who became naturalized U.S. citizens within the past several years or who are native-born citizens, including decorated combat veterans who served in the United States Armed Forces.
21. On May 31, 2012, the United States notified Defendant Detzner that the voter verification process described in Paragraph 16 "appears to be a program to systemically remove

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 7 of 10 PageID 108
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 6 of 9
6
the names of potentially ineligible voters from the official list of eligible voters within the meaning of Section 8 of the NVRA, and does not appear to fall within any of the exCeptions allowed within the 90 day period before a federal election." See Attachment 4 (Letter of May 3 I, 2012, from Department of Justice to Florida Secretary of State, at 2). The letter further advises that because "Florida's primary election for federal office is August 14,2012, that 90day period began on May 16,2012."
22. In a letter dated June 6, 2012, Defendant Detzner responded that the Defendants intended to proceed with their voter verification process. See Attachment 5 (Letter of June 6, 2012 from Florida Secretary of State to Department of Justice).
23. On June 11,2012, the United States infonned the State that because Florida had indicated its unwillingness to comply with the requirements of the NVRA, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division had authorized an enforcement action against Florida. See Attachment 6 (Letter of June 11 from Department of Justice to Florida Secretary of State).
24. Defendants have directed the 67 Florida County Supervisors of Elections to proceed to implement the voter verification procedures set forth in Attachments] and 2, which include potentially removing individuals identified on the lists resulting from the database matching described in Paragraph 16.
25. Defendants' Yoter verification procedures, as described in paragraphs 16 to 19, constitute a program with the purpose of systematically removing names from the official lists of eligible voters. This program was not completed by May 16,2012, the 90th day before the next Florida primary or general election for Federal office, and does not fall within any of the
statutory exceptions to the 90-day quiet period before that election for Federal office.
Defendants' actions therefore violate Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the NVRA.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 8 of 10 PageID 109 Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 7 of 9
7
26. Defendants' voter verification procedures are inaccurate and unreliable, and therefore violate Section 8(b)(I) of the NVRA, which requires that any such program be "uniform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965[.]" 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b)(1).
27. Unless and until ordered to cease doing so by this Court, Defendants will continue to administer the above-described systematic verification of voters, with an ongoing directive to Supervisors of Elections to systematically investigate, verify, and possibly remove eligible voters from the voter rolls within 90 days of Florida's August 14,2012 primary election for Federal office, in violation of Section 8 of the NVRA. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-6(b)(l), (c)(2)(A).
WHEREFORE, the United States requests that this Court enter an order: 1. Declaring that Defendants are not in compliance with Section 8 of the NVRA; 2. Enjoining the Defendants, their agents, and successors in office and all persons acting in concert with any of them from failing or refusing to comply with the requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA; 3. Enjoining Defendants, their agents, and successors in office and all persons acting in concert with any of them from the systematic removal of registered voters within 90 days of all elections for Federal office pursuant to the database matching procedures described in paragraphs 16 to 19; and 4. Ordering the Defendants, their agents and successors in office and all persons acting in concert with any of them to take all steps necessary to ensure that no registered voter identified as potentially ineligible based on the database matching and voter verification procedures in paragraphs 16

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 9 of 10 PageID 110
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 8 of 9
8
to 19 is removed from the voter rolls within 90 days of a primary or general election for Federal office, absent application of one of the statutory exceptions in Sections 8(a)(3)(A)-(B) and 8(a)(4)(A) of the NVRA. The United States further requests that this Court order such other relief as the interests of
justice may require, together with the costs and disbursement in maintaining this action.
The United States further requests that the consideration of this action be expedited given the importance of the rights sought to be vindicated herein.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 16-4 Filed 07/13/12 Page 10 of 10 PageID 111
Case 4:12-cv-00285-WS-CAS Document 2 Filed 06/12/12 Page 9 of 9
'}
ERIC H, HOLDER, JR Artornt:y General By:

'

./1

./,,~-,
/ ,// -, l;-'~"/;/ ,,-'"/;\'1..-t,

j . j /

V .vI ' r.,/~.

C\....t

~r

--f~'"/I/
,/ /

~

1..__-'-

---

.

m, Y. ..,- ...- . - - - -...-----~ .....
T. ClIRISTlA;--: HERRE\.

JOH:" AI.nFRT RLSS, !V

FUSE SA:'-.DRr\ SHORt:

JFNIGH J. GARRETT

At~.)m~·ys, \'oting Secti011

(i\'i1 Rlglm Di\ isiOG

U.S. Department ofJustic<:

Room 7254 N WB

950 Pcnnsyhania Ave.. l\:.W.

Wa;,hingltlll. D.C 20530

Telephone: (800) 253-3931

Facsimile: (202) 307·396!

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket
General Information

Case Name Docket Number Court Nature of Suit

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner 8:12-cv-01294 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Civil Rights: Voting

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=20.xml

 
 Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket

Printed By: Joseph Chatham on Thursday, September 20, 2012 - 9:00 PM

Related Search Criteria
Search Term Date Type
Sources

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund No Date Selection Search (Docket) U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Dockets

Part Description 1 19 pages
2 Exhibit A - May 31, 2012 Letter

Multiple Documents

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=26.xml

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID 117

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND,)

as an organization; MURAT LIMAGE;

)

PAMELA GOMEZ,

)

Plaintiffs.

)

v.

)

CIVIL ACTION CASE NO. 8:12-CV-1294-T-27MAP Three Judge Court Requested

KEN DETZNER, in his official

)

capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

)

Defendant.

)

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE PANEL 1. This is an action to enforce rights guaranteed to Murat Limage, Pamela Gomez, and Mi Familia Vota Education Fund ("MFVEF") (together with Murat Limage and Pamela Gomez, "Plaintiffs") by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. 2. Defendant Ken Detzner, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State, has failed to obtain Section 5 preclearance before implementing, and causing to be implemented, certain changes in standards, practices, and procedures in Florida affecting voting in the five covered counties. Specifically, Defendant has put a series of new procedures into effect for conducting voter registration list maintenance activities, including but not limited to, matching a list generated by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV") database and the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS") database with names on the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service's ("USCIS")' Systematic Alien Verification
1 USCIS is overseen by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"). It was formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS").

US ACTIVE:144 0 21 309\1 O\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 19 PageID 118
for Entitlements ("SAVE") database, and checking the eligibility of "potential non-citizens" in order to initiate a process which will result in the removal of registered voters and the threatened removal of registered voters from the voting rolls.
3. The Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief prohibiting the Defendant from continuing to implement the new voter purge procedures unless and until Section 5 preclearance has been obtained from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney General.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 4. This action challenges new voter purge procedures that have been implemented without Section 5 preclearance by the Defendant Secretary of State and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 to halt the continued use of the un-precleared voter purge procedures, and to require that Defendant undertake appropriate remedial measures to restore the legally enforceable status quo ante. 5. Under the new voter purge procedures, Defendant generated a list of approximately 2,600 registered voters whom Defendant, based upon DHSMV database records, claimed to suspect of being ineligible to vote due to non-citizenship. Without first obtaining the required Section 5 preclearance, Defendant directed all Florida county Supervisors of Elections to institute voter registration list maintenance activities against the registered voters, including the removal and/or denial of the right to vote to individuals who failed to respond to the required mailings. Many, but not all, election supervisors refused to comply with the Defendant's directive due to inaccuracies in the data. Nevertheless, Defendant has informed the State's election supervisors that the new purge procedures are being resumed in a modified form. Upon
2
US ACTIVE:144021309110199995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 19 PageID 119
information and belief, Defendant will not seek Section 5 preclearance for any of the new purge procedures.
6. Defendant has confirmed that he is proceeding with the new voter purge procedures despite: 1) widely-reported information showing that the targeting procedure is highly inaccurate; 2) strong opposition from numerous Florida county Supervisors of Elections; and 3) formal notice by the United States Department of Justice that Defendant's implementation of the procedures violates Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
7. As explained below, Defendant's actions continue to violate the rights of Plaintiffs as secured by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.
8. Plaintiffs have no plain, speedy, or adequate remedy at law other than the relief requested in this Complaint. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendant will continue to illegally enforce the new voter purge procedures against registered voters within the five Florida counties subject to the Section 5 preclearance requirement.
REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE PANEL 9. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973(a), " ja]ny action under this section shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28 of the United States Code and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court." Plaintiffs, by their counsel, therefore, request the Court to notify the Chief Judge of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that Plaintiffs' claim that Defendants have failed to comply with the preclearance provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is required to be heard by a district court of three judges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284 and 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.
3
US ACTIVE:144021309110\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 19 PageID 120
JURISDICTION 10. This civil action is authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1343, see Allen v. State Bd. Elections, 393 U.S. 544 (1969), and by 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to redress the deprivation under color of state statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of rights, privileges, or immunities secured to Plaintiffs by the Constitution and laws of the United States. This action is also authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1973j to secure equitable and other relief under an act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights. 11. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) & (4), and 42 U.S.C. § 1973j(f). This Court has jurisdiction to grant both declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. 12. Jurisdiction for Plaintiffs' claim for attorneys' fees is based on 42 U.S.C. §§ 19731(e) and 1988. 13. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
PARTIES 14. Plaintiff MURAT LIMAGE is a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. Mr. Limage is a citizen of the United States of America and a qualified and legally registered Florida voter. Mr. Limage is of Haitian descent. 15. Plaintiff PAMELA GOMEZ is a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. Ms. Gomez is a citizen of the United States of America and a qualified and legally registered Florida voter. Ms. Gomez is of Hispanic, specifically, Dominican descent. 16. Plaintiff MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND is a national non-profit organization dedicated to working with the Latino community to increase civic participation. MFVEF maintains a Florida office at 615 Herndon Avenue, Suite F, Orlando, Florida 32803. A
4
US ACTIVE:144021309110199995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 19 PageID 121
core component of MFVEF's mission is to increase voter registration and voting by eligible Latino citizens. To achieve this goal, MFVEF registers voters and engages in voter education campaigns via television, radio and print media announcements, distribution of voter-registration literature, and voter mobilization efforts. The Secretary of State's new voter registration procedures will frustrate MFVEF's mission by interfering with its efforts to register eligible voters and increase civic engagement in the Latino community. Further, it will force MFVEF to divert resources from its regular activities to educate and assist voters in complying with the new purge procedures.
17. The rights this suit seeks to vindicate are germane to the purposes of the organizational plaintiff, and the claims alleged herein do not require the participation of its individual clients in the lawsuit. Indeed, without the relief requested herein, the organization will be harmed by the substantial diversion of its resources and the frustration of its organizational purposes.
18. Defendant KEN DETZNER ("Defendant " or " Secretary of State ") is the Secretary
of State of Florida and is sued in his official capacity. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 97.012, the Secretary of State is the chief election officer of Florida, and as such, is responsible for the administration of state laws affecting voting, and for assuring that elections in the State are conducted in accordance with the law. The Secretary of State is required to provide written direction and opinions to the Supervisors of Elections on the performance of their official duties. Defendant Detzner is the state official responsible for seeking preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of any changes affecting voting practices or procedures enacted by the state legislature. The Defendant's principal office is in Tallahassee, Florida.
5
US ACTLVE:144021309\1O\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 19 PageID 122
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAW A. The Defendant Implemented New Voter Purge Procedures Based Upon Database
Matching Without Preclearance 19. The State of Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in that state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America. See Fla. Stat. § 97.041. 20. The State of Florida assigns responsibility to its county Supervisors of Elections to ensure that any eligible applicant for voter registration is registered to vote. See Fla. Stat. § 98.045(1). Supervisors of Elections must conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance. See Fla. Stat. § 98.065. The Department of State must ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records. See Fla. Stat. § 98.075. 21. Prior to 2010, individuals in Florida were permitted to apply for a driver's license without providing proof of citizenship but were required to advise the DHSMV whether they had citizenship at the time of application. This information was included in the drivers' license database maintained by the DHSMV. 22. Beginning on or about January 1, 2010, the DHSMV began to require individuals applying for a new or renewed driver's license or state photo identification card to provide documentary proof of identity and lawful status in the United States. The cycle for all renewals will not be completed until December 1, 2017. At that point, DHSMV records should be updated with supporting documentation of legal status. 23. Upon information and belief, Florida has never attempted to update the records of the DHSMV to reflect individuals who have become naturalized United States citizens after obtaining a Florida drivers' license. Citizenship status is only updated in the DHSMV's database at the time of driver's license renewals.
6
US ACTIVE:144 021 309\1 O\999g5.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 19 PageID 123
24. Prior to April 2, 2012, the State of Florida had no legally enforceable procedure
for systematically instituting voter registration Iist maintenance procedures against individual
registered voters based upon citizenship information maintained by the DHSMV.
25. Upon information and belief, on or before April 2012, the Florida Division of
Elections began to produce lists of Florida registered voters that it classified as suspected non-
citizens based upon administrative records matching between the FVRS database and the
DHSMV database.
26. On or about April 2, 2012, the Florida Secretary of State and the Florida Division of Elections notified all county Supervisors of Elections via email entitled "List Maintenance
Information and webinar" that they would be receiving lists of potential non-citizens in an Excel
spreadsheet on CD via FedEx, and that "a webinar is being created to assist you with processing
these files, and to inform you of the process of vetting the files."
27. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State directed the county Supervisors
of Elections to conduct the following actions:
Initiate notice (within 7 days). Send notice by certified mail, return receipt requested or by some other means of verified delivery). Notice must include: A statement of basis for ineligibility; [a] copy of any supporting documentation, Print out the latest screen shot from the DHSMV DAVE containing legal status. This is what DHSMV has last recorded. Redact confidential/personal identifying information such as DL, state ID #, SSN, and signature; [a] statement that failure to respond within 30 days may result in removal from rolls; [a] return form that requires voter to admit or deny accuracy of information; [a] statement that a person denying ineligibility has a right to a hearing; [c]ontact information for Supervisor of Elections; [i]nstructions for seeking restoration of civil rights (Not applicable in these cases).
(Emphasis in original). 28. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State provided the county Supervisors of Elections with a "Suggested Sample Notice to Send Potentially Ineligible Non-U.S. Citizen."
7
US ACTIVE:444029309110\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 19 PageID 124
The sample notice stated, in part, that "[i]f you fail to respond within thirty (30) days, we may determine that you are ineligible and remove your name from the voter registration rolls. You will then no longer be eligible [sic] to vote," (emphasis added).
29. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State directed the county Supervisors of Elections to: "Allow voter 30 days to respond (if you receive verification that mail delivered); [p]ublish notice ONLY if notice undeliverable (Section 98.075(7)(a)2.a.-e, Fla. Stat.); [p]rovide hearing ONLY if person denies ineligibility AND person requests hearing." (emphasis in original).
30. In an April 2012 webinar, the Secretary of State provided the county Supervisors of Elections with "Pointers." These pointers advised that "[it is strongly encouraged but not required (for continuing registration purposes) that a registered voter who is determined to be a U.S. citizen to contact DHSMV to correct or update his or her legal status on record."
31. In an April 2012 webinar for the county Supervisors of Elections, the Secretary of State provided further "Pointers." These pointers directed that:
If you determine that a registered voter initially identified as not a U.S. citizen has subsequently become a U.S. citizen, this person shall be deemed eligible for purposes of continuing registration and should not be removed from the rolls. HOWEVER, the matter should be referred to the State Attorney. See Section 104.011 (false swearing of an application) and Section 104.42, F.S. (`duty to report fraudulent registration and illegal voting'). 32. On May 9, 2012, the Secretary of State issued a press release announcing that the Florida Division of Elections had compared the FVRA database and the DHSMV database to identify potential non-citizens. This press release announced that the Secretary of State had sent the names of more than 2,600 potential non-citizens to Florida's 67 county Supervisors of Elections for "review and, if warranted, removal from the voter rolls."
S
US ACTNE:14402'5309\10\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 19 PageID 125
33. The Secretary of State neither provided nor required uniform statewide procedures to be applied by county Supervisors of Elections in evaluating whether individuals whose names appeared on the aforementioned Excel spreadsheets were United States citizens. Further, the Secretary of State did not specify the documentation that could be produced by such an individual in order to prove citizenship. Instead, the Secretary of State merely advised all county Supervisors of Elections of different documents that may be acceptable proof of citizenship.
34. Several counties in the State, including Hillsborough County, used the April 2012 state-generated report as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship. See Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7). The mailing notified the voter that if he or she failed to respond within 30 days, the voter might or would be removed from the voting list.
35. Upon information and belief, a disproportionate share of the individuals against whom the Secretary of State directed purge procedures to be instituted on the basis of the April 2012 list are racial and language minorities.
36. Upon information and belief, the Secretary of State is aware that the April 2012 list erroneously targeted large numbers of voters, because hundreds of the affected individuals established that they are United States citizens and lawfully registered voters.
37. On or about May 31, 2012, the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, sent a letter to the Secretary of State advising that Defendant implemented and enforced the new voter purge procedures without Section 5 preclearance. Specifically, the Department of Justice's letter informed the Secretary of State that the matching procedures implemented to verify the eligibility of registered voters, and the subsequent notification and possible removal of registered voters from the voter rolls, is a change affecting voting in the five
9
US ACTIVE:144 0 2 1 309\1 O\9999&3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 19 PageID 126
Florida counties that are subject to Section 5 of the Voting Rights, and that such change was not submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for judicial review or to the Attorney General for administrative review as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. A copy of the May 31, 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
38. On June 6, 2012, the Secretary of State responded to the Department of Justice's letter, disagreeing with the Department of Justice's position and asserting that the new voter purge procedures are consistent with federal law, including the Voting Rights Act.
39. Upon information and belief, as of late June 2012, the county Supervisors of Elections notified Defendant that they would no longer be using the April 2012 list to purge voters from the voting rolls, largely due to the list's inaccuracies. However, in Collier County, voters were removed from the voting rolls based on the Secretary of State's list as recently as June 26, 2012.
40. Subsequently, in a hearing on June 27, 2012, in the United States' NVRA lawsuit currently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, 2 the State took the position that Florida had temporarily ceased purging voters based solely on the flawed April 2012 DHSMV data. At that hearing, the State of Florida represented to Judge Hinkle that if it was granted access to the United States Customs and Immigration Service ("USCIS") "SAVE" system, it would resume the process of purging voters based upon the DHSMV data in combination with the SAVE data.
41. The SAVE system (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Program) is an intergovernmental initiative designed to help federal, state, tribal, and local government agencies verify the lawful presence of applicants when granting benefits, licenses and other lawful 2 See The United States ofAnnerica v. State ofFlorida, Ken Detzner, Case No. 4:12-cv-285-RH-CAS (N.D. Fla.).
10
US ACTIVE:144021309\10199995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 19 PageID 127
purposes. The program provides an online facility for subscribers to verify the lawful presence of individuals based upon certain identifying information.
42. On June 11, 2012, the State of Florida brought suit against the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 ("IIRIRA"), which provides that DHS/USCIS "shall respond to any inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information." 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c). The State alleged that between early 2011 and June 2012, the State of Florida, through Defendant, had unsuccessfully petitioned DHS for access to the SAVE system. Florida claimed that it was entitled to SAVE system access as a matter of federal law, and that DHS was violating the State's rights in not providing access. Florida's complaint requested that the State's entire voter registration database be analyzed through the SAVE system.
43. In a letter dated July 9, 2012, DHS informed Florida that it would provide access to the SAVE database on the same basis as other States. This will involve individual queries including the "A-number", which is a USCIS-specific identifier.
44. Upon information and belief, DHS requires states to provide an alien registration or admission number before it can verify citizenship in the SAVE database.
45. Upon information and belief, Defendant is continuing the voter purge procedure by cross-referencing the same faulty list it generated with the DHSMV database with the new information it received access to in the SAVE database in order to remove potential ineligible voters from the voter rolls.
11
US ACTIVE:144021309\10\139995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 19 PageID 128
46. Plaintiffs have suffered harm and have an imminent threat of continued harm because the State is continuing voter registration list maintenance activities under procedures that have not received Section 5 preclearance, and because Defendant will continue to implement such procedures without Section 5 preclearance unless restrained by this Court. B. The State of Florida Violated the Preclearance Requirements of Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act 47. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. §1973c, is a temporary provision that prohibits changes in election practices or procedures in states and political subdivisions with a documented history of discriminatory voting practices until the new procedures have been determined, either by a declaratory judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or by the absence of an objection by the United States Attorney General, not to have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. This process is referred to as Section 5 "preclearance." 48. The Florida counties of Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe are currently covered under Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, and Section 5 preclearance is required prior to implementing any changes to election practices or procedures affecting those counties. 49. The actions of the Secretary of State in instituting voter registration list maintenance procedures based upon motor vehicles data matching and SAVE database matching constitute changes affecting voting that require Section 5 preclearance. At the time these purge programs were instituted, in April 2012 and in July 2012, respectively, they were new, systematic processes that placed currently registered voters at risk of being removed from the voter registration rolls, and were intended to result in currently registered voters being removed
12
US ACTIVE:144021309110\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 19 PageID 129
from the voter registration rolls. No practice or procedure requiring voter purging on the basis of motor vehicles data matching was in effect in Florida on November 1, 1972, nor has Florida obtained Section 5 preclearance since that date to conduct voter purging on the basis of motor vehicles data matching.
50. These actions, which form the basis for voter challenges, hearings, correspondence and/or removal, constitute voting changes which require Section 5 preclearance before they lawfully can be implemented in Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, or Monroe County.
51. All of these voting changes were implemented by the Defendant without having first obtained Section 5 preclearance. C. Plaintiff Murat Limage's Voting Rights Have Been Violated
52. Plaintiff Murat Limage is a United States citizen, a lawfully registered voter, and a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida.
53. Mr. Limage received a driver's license from the Florida DHSMV in 1999 and last updated his driver's license November 6, 2008. Mr. Limage naturalized as a United States citizen on October 19, 2010 and registered to vote on November 1, 2010. Mr. Limage changed his address in or around November of 2011 and contacted the Hillsborough county Supervisor of Elections office to update their voter registration records to reflect his new address. Mr. Limage subsequently received a voter registration card at his new address.
54. Mr. Limage received a letter from the Supervisor of Elections of Hillsborough County, dated April 13, 2012, indicating that they were "notified that [Mr. Limage] may not be a US Citizen" and requiring documentation evidencing his citizenship. The letter further advised that the "failure to submit the [citizenship information] within (30) days may result in the
13
US ACTIVE:144 42 1 309\1O\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 19 PageID 130
removal of [Mr. Limage's] name from the voter registration rolls" and he would no longer be eligible to vote.
55. Mr. Limage was required to prove his citizenship by providing either a copy of his driver's license, passport, birth certificate, or other document verifying that he was a United States citizen. Accordingly, Mr. Limage drove to the Hillsborough County Elections and Registration Office in order to prove his citizenship.
56. Mr. Limage presented his United States passport to a Supervisor of Elections office official. The official photocopied his passport and told him that he would not receive written confirmation that he had provided proof of citizenship, but that he was not required to take any further action. Mr. Limage remains concerned that he will not be permitted to vote in the upcoming election. D. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez's Voting Rights Have Been Violated
57. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez is a United States citizen, a lawfully registered voter, and a resident of Hillsborough County, Florida. She has been a resident of Florida since July 2005.
58. Ms. Gomez received a driver's license from the Florida DHSMV February 20, 2006 and has not since been required to renew her driver's license. She naturalized as a United States citizen in February 2011 and registered to vote that same day.
59. Ms. Gomez has yet to receive a letter from the Supervisor of Elections requesting proof of her citizenship but expects that her voter eligibility may be challenged because her DHSMV records may not currently reflect her United States citizenship. E. MFVEF's Rights Have Been Violated
58. Plaintiff MFVEF is a national non-profit organization dedicated to working with the Latino community in Florida and across the nation to increase civic participation.
14
U$ ACTIVE:144021309\10\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 19 PageID 131
59. MFVEF engages in voter registration activities, voter education campaigns via television, radio and print media announcements, distribution of voter-registration literature, and voter mobilization efforts which include transportation to the voting polls. From March 1, 2012 to June 5, 2012, MFVEF has registered 14,875 voters in Florida. Of that number, 6,596 are registered in Hillsborough County.
60. The Defendant's new voter purge procedures will frustrate MFVEF's organizational mission by interfering with its efforts to register eligible voters particularly among newly-naturalized citizens and diverting its limited resources to assisting voters in complying with the new purge procedures.
CLAIM FOR RELIEF CLAIM ONE
(Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) 61. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 60 as if fully set forth herein. 62. Defendant has failed to secure Section 5 preclearance for the new voter purge procedures identified in Paragraphs 18-51 above, as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c, in Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough and Monroe Counties. 63. Any removal of registered voters, threatened removal of registered voters, or other implementation of the new voter purge procedures identified in Paragraphs 18-51 above, without Section 5 preclearance, is void and violates the rights of Plaintiffs as secured by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Unless enjoined, Defendant will proceed with the voter removals in violation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
15
U5 ACTIVE:144 02 1 3 09\10\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 19 PageID 132
64. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaratory judgment that Defendant's implementation of the new voter purge procedures violates Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and to an injunction prohibiting the implementation of the new voter purge procedures and restoring the legally enforceable status quo ante unless and until Section 5 preclearance has been obtained from the United States Department of Justice or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
REQUEST FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF 65. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973c and 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Plaintiffs seek a declaration that Defendant's implementation and use of the new voter purge procedures absent preclearance by the Department of Justice or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia violates the right of Plaintiffs as secured by the Voting Rights Act.
BASIS FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF 66. Plaintiffs have no plain, adequate or complete remedy at law to redress the wrongs alleged herein and this suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is their only means of securing adequate redress from Defendant's unlawful practices. Plaintiffs will continue to suffer irreparable injury from Defendant's acts, policies and practices set forth herein unless Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court enter Judgment granting Plaintiffs:
A. A declaratory judgment that Defendant's actions violate the rights of Plaintiffs as secured by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. B. Injunctive relief enjoining Defendant, his successors in office, agents, employees, attorneys and those persons acting in concert with him or at his direction from using and
16
US ACTIVE:144 021 309\1 0\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 19 PageID 133

implementing the new voter purge procedures, and ordering Defendant to cease using information generated by matching with DHSMV data and/or the SAVE system for voter registration list maintenance purposes without Section 5 preclearance. C. Engage in affirmative, corrective measures, including but not limited to sending letters rescinding its previous correspondence to county Supervisors of Elections relating to the new voter purge procedures, advising the Supervisors of Elections that the distributed lists should not be used for any purpose, and to report immediately to the Court any county that refuses to comply; D. An order of this Court retaining jurisdiction over this matter until the Defendant has complied with all the orders and mandates of the Court; E. The costs of this suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees; and, F. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DATED: July 27, 2012

Respectfully submitted,
Is! Edward Soto WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Edward Soto Florida Bar No. 0265144 Edward McCarthy Florida Bar No. 683701 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1200 Miami, Florida Tel: (305) 577-3100 Edward.soto@weil.com Edward.mccarth weil.com

17
US ACTIVE:144 02 1 309\1 O99995.343O

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 19 PageID 134
is! Robert A. Kengle
LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW Robert A. Kengle Dara Lindenbaum 1401 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 662-8324 bkengle@lawyerscommittee.org dlindenbauznnl awyers corninittee. org
is! Randall C. Marshall
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA, INC. Randall C. Marshall Florida Bar No. 181765 Julie Ebenstein Florida Bar No. 91033 4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340 Miami, Florida 33137-3227 Tel. 786-363-2700 Fax 786-363-1108 rmarshall@aclufl.org j ebenstein(a7acl ufl.org
Isl M. Laughlin McDonald
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION M. Laughlin McDonald 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 523-2721 lmcdonald@aclu.org koconnor@aclu.org
18
US ACTIVE:144021309110199995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 19 PageID 135
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 27, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send notice of electronic filing to all parties at the email addresses on file with the Clerk of Court.
/s/ Edward Soto Edward Soto (Fla. Bar No. 0265144) edward.soto@weil.com WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 1395 Brickell Ave, Suite 1200 Miami, FL 33131
(305) 577-3100
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota Education Fund; Murat Limage; and Pamela Gomez
19
US ACTIVE:144 02 1 309\1 O\99995.3430

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID 136
EXHIBIT A

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID 137
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Yot)ng Seetton - NFYB 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washtngron, DC 20530
May 31, 2012
The Honorable Ken Detzner Florida Secretary of State Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250
Dear Secretary Detzner:
This refers to certain new procedures that the State of Florida has recently implemented to attempt to verify the eligibility of registered voters. Specifically, we understand that the Florida Secretary of State is working in coordination with the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV") to identify registered voters for possible removal from the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS"). Based on recent news reports, public
a comments by state and local officials, and our review of Florida Department of State training
presentation, it appears that Florida is seeking (1) to verify voter registration records in FVRS against databases maintained by DHSIVIV, as well as possibly other agencies, for purposes of identifying potentially ineligible voters based on citizenship, and (2) to distribute the results of this matching process to county supervisors of elections for further action, including possible removal of registered voters from the voter roIIs. News reports and other information, including a press release from your office, indicate that this procedure has been initiated and is ongoing.
The practice described above appears to be different from the benchmark practice currently in force or effect in the five covered counties in Florida subject to the requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c,
Our records do not reflect that these changes affecting voting have been submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for judicial review or to the Attorney General for administrative review as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. 42 U.S.C. 1973c(a). Accordingly, it is necessary that they either be brought before that court or submitted to the Attorney General for a determination that they neither have the purpose nor will have the effect of discriminating on account of race, color, or membership in a Ianguage minority group under Section 5. Changes , that affect voting are legally unenforceable in the five covered counties unless and until the requisite determination under Section 5 has been obtained. Clark v, Roemer, 500 U.S. 646 (1991). Should you desire to make an administrative submission of these changes under Section 5, please refer to file number 2012-3250 in your response so that it may be channeled correctly.
We also note that the State of Florida, as a whole, is subject to the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 ("NVRA"), 42 U.S.C. 1973gg 1973gg-10. Section S

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 20-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID 138

of the NVRA provides the standards for conducting list maintenance for voter registration lists used for elections for federal office. We have a shared interest in ensuring that the NVRA's goal of maintaining accurate and current registration rolls for federal elections is met. At the same time, Section 8 ofthe NVRA reflects Congress's determination that list maintenance efforts must also be conducted within an appropriate time period, and in a uniform and non-discriminatory manner,
In particular, Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the NVRA provides that "[a] State shall complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the naives of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters." 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(c)(2)(A). Further, Section 8(b)(1) of the NVRA provides that programs and activities aimed at "ensuring the maintenance of an accurate and current voter registration roll" shall be "uniform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965...." 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(b)(1). The practice described above appears to be a program to systematically remove the names of potentially ineligible voters from the official list of eligible voters within the meaning of Section 8 of the NVRA, and does not appear to fall within any of the exceptions allowed within the 90 day period before a federal election, Because Florida's primary election for federal office is August 14, 2012, that 90 day period began on May 16, 2012. As a consequence, the practice appears to violate the NVRA,
To enable us to meet our responsibility to enforce federal law, please inform us by June 6 of the action that the State of Florida plans to take concerning the matters discussed in this letter. Specifically, please advise whether the State intends to cease the practice discussed above, so that the Department can determine what further action, if any,. is necessary. If you have any questions, please call Voting Section attorney Elise Sandra Shore at 202-305-0070.

cc: Attorney General Pam Bondi Daniel Nordby, Esq.

istian Herren, Jr. Voting Section

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket
General Information

Case Name Docket Number Court Nature of Suit

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner 8:12-cv-01294 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Civil Rights: Voting

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=26.xml

 
 Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket

Printed By: Joseph Chatham on Thursday, September 20, 2012 - 9:01 PM

Related Search Criteria
Search Term Date Type
Sources

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund No Date Selection Search (Docket) U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Dockets

Part Description 1 21 pages 2 Exhibit 1a 3 Exhibit 1b 4 Exhibit 1c 5 Exhibit 1d 6 Exhibit 2a 7 Exhibit 2b 8 Exhibit 2c 9 Exhibit 2d 10 Exhibit 3 11 Exhibit 4 12 Exhibit 5 13 Exhibit 6 14 Exhibit 7 15 Exhibit 8 16 Exhibit 9 17 Exhibit 10

Multiple Documents

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=28.xml

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 21 PageID 143

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

)

MIFAMILIA VOTAEDUCATIONFUND,

)

as an organization; MURAT LIMAGE;

)

PAMELA GOMEZ,

)

)

Plaintiffs.

)

)

v.

)

)

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as

)

Florida Secretary of State,

)

)

Defendant.

)

________________________________ )

CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 8:12-CV-1294-T-27MAP

STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 21 PageID 144
- 1I. INTRODUCTION
The United States files this Statement of Interest in opposition to Defendant's motion to dismiss, ECF 16, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 517, because this case presents an important question regarding the proper construction of Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c ("Section 5"). 1 The State of Florida has adopted a new database matching program that results in registered voters being removed from the voter rolls. This new practice has not been submitted for administrative or judicial preclearance pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and despite a lack of preclearance, the change has been implemented in Florida's covered counties subject to Section 5. The plaintiffs claims are therefore not moot, as the change has been implemented in covered jurisdictions without appropriate preclearance, including the removal of voters from the registration rolls. Further, nothing in the Help America Vote Act ("HAVA") requires the State to implement its chosen database matching program, nor does it excuse the failure to obtain preclearance. In this case, as in all Section 5 enforcement actions, the United States has a strong interest in ensuring that Section 5 is vigorously and uniformly enforced. The United States therefore urges the Court to deny the Florida Secretary of State's motion to dismiss. II. LEGAL BACKGROUND
Florida's new voter registration list maintenance practices and procedures are voting changes that must be submitted for review before they can be implemented in the five counties subject to Section 5-Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe Counties. Here, at the
1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 517, "[t]he Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States...." Under this provision, "[t]he United States Executive has the statutory authority, in any case in which it is interested, to file a statement of interest[.]" Gross v. German Found. Indus. Initiative, 456 F.3d 363, 384 (3d Cir. 2006).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 21 PageID 145
-2direction of the State, the covered counties implemented these new, unprecleared voting practices and procedures. Even though the State represents that it has stopped additional implementation of its program, this case is not moot because the covered counties have already implemented this unprecleared change, impacting voters. The United· States respectfully submits that Defendant's arguments are contrary to the plain language of Section 5 and would lead to results that would undermine Congress's intent that covered jurisdictions submit all voting related changes either to the U.S. Department of Justice for administrative review, or to a threejudge panel in the District Court of the District of Columbia for judicial review.
Section 5 applies to all changes of "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice or procedure with respect to voting" adopted or sought to be implemented by covered jurisdictions, and the Act defines the term "voting" very broadly. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973c, 1973!(c)(1 ). The Supreme Court has made clear that, in covered jurisdictions, "all changes in voting must be precleared." Presley v. Etowah County Comm 'n, 502 U.S. 491, 501 (1992). In this case, as outlined below, the State of Florida had previously submitted voting changes related to both its implementation of HAVA and other voter registration list maintenance procedures involving the use of database matching. None of these previous submissions, which received preclearance, included the procedures at issue in this case, namely, matching the records contained in the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS") with citizenship data contained in the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicle ("DHSMV") MAN Driver and Vehicle Express ("MDVA") database, forwarding the results of this data matching to County Supervisors of Elections, and requiring Supervisors of Elections to initiate the removal of registered voters from FVRS based on this matching. Florida's use of this matching procedure constitutes a change in practice and procedure that requires preclearance.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 21 PageID 146
-3A. Legal Standard in Section 5 Enforcement Actions The legal standards to be applied in Section 5 cases have been·well established by the Supreme Court. Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to "rid the country of racial discrimination in voting." South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 315 (1966). Section 5 is an integral part of the Act, designed "to shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of the evil to its victim[s], by freezing election procedures in the covered areas unless the changes can be shown to be nondiscriminatory." Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., 520 U.S. 471, 477 (1997) (Bossier I) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Section 5 "automatically suspends the operation of voting regulations ... and furnishes mechanisms for enforcing the suspension." Katzenbach, 383 U.S. at 335. This suspension occurs "pending scrutiny by federal authorities to determine whether their use would violate the Fifteenth Amendment." !d. at 334. In 2006, Congress reauthorized the preclearance requirements of Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act. See Shelby County, Alabama, v. Holder, 679 F.3d 848 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (upholding the reauthorization of Section 5). The Voting Rights Act sets forth a unique statutory scheme to resolve issues that arise under the preclearance provisions. The Act provides for a clear division ofjurisdiction between "substantive discrimination questions" and "coverage questions." Allen v. State B,oard of Elections, 393 U.S. 544, 559 (1969) (internal quotations omitted). "Congress expressly reserved for consideration by the District Court for the District of Columbia or the Attorney General-the determination whether a covered change does or does not have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color." Perkins v. Matthews, 400 U.S. 379, 385 (1971) (internal quotations omitted). The Attorney General and the United States District Court for the District of Columbia have "exclusive authority," Lopez v. Monterey County, 519

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 21 PageID 147
-4U.S. 9, 23 (1996) (Lopez 1), to make the substantive preclearance determination of"whether a
proposed change actually discriminates on account of race," United States v. Bd. ofSupervisors of Warren County, 429 U.S. 642, 646 (1977). Such a determination is "foreclosed" to any other court. Perkins, 400 U.S. at 385. Pursuant to Sections 5 and 14(b) of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973c & 1973/(b), covered jurisdictions seeking preclearance of a new voting change have a choice of filing a declaratory judgment action in the District Court for the District of Columbia, or making an administrative submission to the Attorney General, who then has 60 days to act on a completed submission. Morris v. Gressette, 432 U.S. 491, 501-02, 504 n. 19, 505 n.21 (1977).
Pursuant to Sections 12(d) and (f) of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973(d) & (f), the United States and/or private plaintiffs can bring coverage actions to enjoin enforcement of unprecleared changes. Such coverage actions are heard by three-judge federal district courts convened in jurisdictions covered by Section 5. Such courts may consider only "coverage" questions, determining "whether a particular state enactment is subject to the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and therefore must be submitted for approval before enforcement." Allen, 393 U.S. at 559-60. In such coverage cases, a court "lacks authority to consider the discriminatory purpose or nature of the changes." Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 23. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that there are only three issues to be decided in a coverage action: "whether § 5 covers a contested change, whether § 5's approval requirements were satisfied, and if the requirements were not satisfied, what temporary remedy, if any, is appropriate" until the change is precleared or abandoned. Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 23; see also McCain v. Lybrand, 465 U.S. 236, 251 n. 17 (1984) (same); City ofLockhart v. United States, 460 U.S. 125, 129 n. 3 (1983) (same). This three-part test must be applied in a Section 5 enforcement action such as the present case.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 21 PageID 148
-5 Pursuant to Section 5, "[w]henever" a covered jurisdiction "enact[s] or seek[s] to administer any ... standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect," it must first obtain administrative or judicial preclearance. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. The language of Section 5 is clear: "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice or procedure with respect to voting" adopted or sought to be implemented by covered jurisdictions must be submitted for preclearance. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a); Presley, 502 U.S. at 501; see also Allen, 393 U.S. at 566 ("Congress intended to reach any state enactment which altered the election law of a covered State in even a minor way"); Clark v. Roemer, 500 U.S. 646, 652 (1991) (voting changes in covered jurisdictions "will not be effective as law until and unless [pre]cleared.") (internal quotations and citations omitted). In this case, Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe Counties are subject to the preclearance requirements of Section 5. See 40 Fed. Reg. 43,746 (1975); 41 Fed. Reg. 34,329 (1976). In the case of partially covered states, the Supreme Court has recognized that "§ 5's preclearance requirement applies to a covered county's nondiscretionary efforts to implement a voting change required by state law, notwithstanding the fact that the State is not itself a covered jurisdiction." Lopez v. Monterey County, 525 U.S. 266, 282 (1999) (Lopez II). Further, "[a] State, whether partially or fully covered, has authority to submit any voting change on behalf of its covered jurisdictions and political subunits," and indeed, submissions by the State serve its interests in that "the State is better able to explain to the Attorney General the purpose and effect of voting changes it enacts than are the individual covered jurisdictions." 28 C.F.R. § 51.23. As a majority of a three-judge panel in Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F. Supp. 2d 1150, 1156 (D.S.D. 2002) found, "Congress intended that either the legislative body that enacted the legislation or the executive body that was responsible for administering the legislation would

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 21 PageID 149
-6 be responsible for obtaining preclearance." The Court in that case concluded that the State was the appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action, even though only two counties in South Dakota were subject to Section 5's requirements. Id. (holding that "[u]nder the plain meaning of the Voting Rights Act, the state of South Dakota is an entity that must secure preclearance from the Attorney General or bring a declaratory judgment action" for review of a law passed by the state legislature that impacts voting in the covered counties). In this case, Florida enacted the new database matching program and has required covered counties to implement it, and it is therefore an appropriate defendant in this Section 5 enforcement action.
B. Prior Approval of the State's Benchmark Practices Did Not Include the New Database Matching 'Program
At least two prior submissions by the State of Florida are relevant to this case: its 2005 submission of changes to the state election code, and its 2011 submission that included its database matching program to identify deceased voters for removal from the rolls.
On July 5, 2005, Florida submitted an omnibus bill containing. numerous changes to Florida's election code, including Chapter 2005-278, for preclearance. See Submission No. 2005-2390 (Exhibit 1a)_2 Chapter 2005-278 amended Fla. Stat. 98.075. See Exhibit 1bat 24-25. The submitted changes were significant because they amended, among other things, provisions of the law relating to the creation of a state voter registration database~ the removal of voters from the rolls in certain circumstances, and voter registration list maintenance procedures. For example, the 2005 submission amended Fla. Stat. 98.075 to authorize the Department of State to
2 The United States attaches to this statement of interest the following documents related to Submission Number 2005-2390: Exhibit 1a (the July 5, 2005 cover letter from Florida to the Department); Exhibit 1b (Chapter 2005-278, with changes); Exhibit 1c (a State PowerPoint presentation explaining the changes), and Exhibit 1d (the Sept. 6, 2005 letter from the Department to Florida).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 21 PageID 150
- 7identify voters subject to removal based on the categories of deceased persons, duplicate registrations, felony convictions, and adjudications of mental incapacity, see Exhibit 1b at 25 (Fla. Stat. 98.075(1)-(5)). This provision of the law was also amended to provide that the Department of State and Supervisors of Election could receive information from sources that were not expressly identified in the statute to determine other bases of ineligibility, including citizenship. See id. In support of its 2005 submission, the state submitted a PowerPoint presentation that identified the procedures the Department of State and Supervisors of Election would use to prepare lists for identifying and removing potentially ineligible registrants.3 See Exhibit 1c at 5-7.
On September 6, 2005, the Department precleared the submitted changes but specifically noted that "Chapter 278, Section 20 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.075, which pertains to voter registration record maintenance activities" was "enabling in nature[] ... [t]herefore, the State of Florida is not relieved of its responsibility to seek Section 5 review of any changes affecting voting proposed to be implemented pursuant to this legislation." See Exhibit 1d at Att. A, p. 7 (~ 89) and pp. 1-2 (noting that enabling legislation is identified with an asterisk in the attachment). See Procedures for the Administration of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 28 C.F.R. § 51.15 ("With respect to legislation (1) that enables or permits the State or its political subunits to institute a voting change . . . the failure of the Attorney General to interpose an objection does not exempt from the preclearance requirement the implementation of the particular voting change that is enabled, permitted, or required, unless that implementation is explicitly included and described in the submission of such parent legislation."). Therefore, any new program to
3 This PowerPoint is similar to one issued by the State regarding the database matching program at issue here. See Exhibit 10.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 21 PageID 151
-8check citizenship eligibility pursuant to Florida Stat. 98.075, for example, such as the current program at issue here, would be an enabled change that requires Section 5 review.
On June 8, 2011, the State of Florida submitted another omnibus bill of voting changes that modified portions of Florida's election code, including Chapter 2011-40, for preclearance. See Submission No. 2011-2187 (Exhibit 2a).4 Among other things, the submission amended Fla. Stat. §§ 98.075(3)(b), 98.075(6), and 98.093. The amendments to 98.075(3) related to identifying deceased persons by obtaining information from the Social Security Administration. Exhibit 2b at 14. The amendments to 98.075(6) related to the use of additional sources of information pertaining to the removal of deceased registrants or persons with felony convictions or mental incapacitation adjudications whose voting rights were not restored. See id.; 98.075(2)(5). The submission also included changes to 98.093, which gave the Department of State the authority to "identify ineligible registered voters" by "access[ing] certain information from state and federal officials and entities in the format prescribed." Id. at 15; Fla. Stat. 98.093(1). The changes to the title of Section 98.093 provided that state and local officials had the duty to furnish "information," instead of exclusively providing lists, related to criminal records, deceased persons, and persons deemed mentally incapacitated. Id.; Fla. Stat. 98.093. Notably, thy changes to the title of Section 98.093 of the Florida statutes did not expand the scope of the section. !d. The 2011 submission also gave the Secretary of State the authority to "[p]rovide written direction and opinions to supervisors of elections on the performance of their official duties with respect to the Florida Election Code or rules adopted by the Department of State." Exhibit 2b at 8; Fla. Stat. 97.012.
4 The United States attaches to this statement of interest the following documents relating to Submission Number 2011-2187: Exhibit 2a (the June 8, 2011 cover letter from Florida to the Department); Exhibit 2b (Chapter 2011-40, with changes); Exhibit 2c (a summary of the bill's provisions); and Exhibit 2d (the Aug. 8, 2011letter from the Department to Florida).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 21 PageID 152
-9In support of the State's request for preclearance, Florida sub1_11itted a chart it prepared that outlined the 2011 changes. See Exhibit 2c. The chart identified only the use of the Social Security database as a new source of information for the removal of deceased voters under Fla. Stat. 98.075. See id. at 5. The Department precleared the use of the Social Security database and the authority provided to the Secretary of State.5 See Exhibit 2d. The. 2011 submission did not identify new citizenship database verification procedures. C. The Requirements of the Help America Vote Act The Help America Vote Act ("HAVA") requires that states implement a statewide computerized voter registration list of all voters, see 42 U.S.C. § 15483, but as discussed further below, it does not specifically require the citizen database matching that the State has now undertaken, nor does it excuse a jurisdiction's failure to comply with the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. HAVA provides that States must define, maintain, and administer their computerized voter registration lists. 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(1)(A). As part of the database requirements, Section 303(a) contemplates the use of statewide computerized voter registration lists for voter registration and list maintenance activities. 42 U.S.C. §§ 15483(a)(2); 15483(a)(4); 15483(a)(5)(A)(i) & (ii). HAVA's voter verification provisions, which are set forth at 42 U.S.C. § 15438(a)(5)(A), provide that non-exempt states may not accept or process applications for voter registration unless the applicant includes a driver's license number (for applicants who have a current and valid driver license) or the last four digits of the applicant's social security number (for applicants who do not have a driver license but do have a· social security number).
5 The State withdrew four sets of voting changes, not at issue here, that are subject to litigation in the District Court for the District Columbia. See Florida v. United States, 1: 11-CV-1428 (D.D.C.).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 21 PageID 153
- 10HAVA's voter verification provisions also require that non-exempt states share information in databases to "verify the accuracy of the information provided on applications for voter registration" using driver license or social security information. 42 U.S.C. §§ 15483(a)(5)(B)(i)(ii); 15483(a)(5)(D). Under HAVA, each "State[s] shall determine whether the information provided by an individual is sufficient to meet ... [HAVA's requirements], in accordance with State law.6 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(5)(A)(iii).
HAVA also has computerized list maintenance provisions. 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(2), (4). HAVA' s list maintenance provisions require that the appropriate state and local election officials regularly "perform list maintenance with respect to the computerized list" in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(2)(A)(i)-(ii). States that are exempt under the NVRA because they do not have a voter registration requirement or allow voter registration at the polling place during general elections for federal office are also required to conduct computerized list maintenance activities "in accordance with State law." 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(2)(A)(iii). As a result, all states must have "[s]tate election systems ... [that] include provisions that ensure that voter registration records ... are accurate and updated regularly...." 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(4).
Computerized list maintenance conducted by a State must be performed "in a manner that ensures that ... the name of each registered voter appears in the computerized list; ... only voters who are not registered or who are not eligible to vote are removed from the computerized list; and ... duplicate names are eliminated from the computerized list." 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(2)(B). State election system provisions must also include "[a] system of file
6 When Florida implemented HAVA, the State submitted those changes to the Department for preclearance under Section 5. See, e.g., Submission Number 2003-2929. These provisions of HAVA and the State's implementation of them do not include the database matching based on citizenship.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 21 PageID 154
- 11 maintenance that makes a reasonable effort to remove registrants who are ineligible to vote from the official list of eligible voters" that is consistent with NVRA and employs "[s]afeguards to ensure that eligible voters are not removed in error from the official list of eligible voters." 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(4)(A)-(B).
HAVA neither mandates nor precludes a State's attempts to conduct citizenship list maintenance activities. See 42 U.S.C §§ 15483(a)(2), (4). HAVA's requirements do not "prevent a State from establishing election ... administration requirements that are more strict" than HAVA' s requirements ..." so long as such State requirements are not inconsistent with federal law. 42 U.S.C. § 15484. To that end, HAVA gives states discretion to determine how they will satisfy the statute's mandates, 42 U.S.C. § 15485, provided that the State must still comply with the requirements of the Voting Rights Act and other federal statutes. 42 U.S.C. § 15545. III. FLORIDA'S DATABASE MATCHING PROGRAM IS A CHANGE AFFECTING
VOTING THAT MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR PRECLEARANCE PURSUANT TO SECTIONS A. The Practice at Issue Here is a Change Subject to Section 5 Review Florida implemented new non-citizen voter verification practices and procedures that are unsubmitted changes that differ from the State's benchmark procedures previously in force or effect. These voter list maintenance procedures are directly related to voting and the ability to have a cast ballot properly counted. See 42 U.S.C.1973l; see also Presley, 502 U.S. at 509 ("Our prior cases hold, and we reaffirm today, that every change in rules governing voting must be precleared."); Allen, 393 U.S. at 565 ("The Voting Rights Act was aimed at the subtle, as well as the obvious, state regulations which have the effect of denying citizens their right to vote because of their race"). Unlike Presley, which held that changes affecting "the allocation of power

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 21 PageID 155
- 12-
among governmental officials" was not a covered change, Florida's new non-citizen list
maintenance practice and procedures "bear a direct relation to voting itself." See 502 U.S. at
510. Indeed, removing voters from the list of registered voters, which makes them ineligible to
cast a ballot, is a change "in the composition of the electorate." Id. at 502-03. States are required to identify changes with specificity for ad~inistrative review. 28
C.P.R.§§ 51.26 to 51.27; Clarkv. Roemer, 500 U.S. at 658; see also McCain v. Lybrand, 465
U.S. 236, 249-50 (1984) ("the Act would plainly be subverted if the Attorney General could ever
be deemed to have approved a voting change when the proposal was neither properly submitted
nor in fact evaluated by him."). Thus, "the submission of legislation for administrative
preclearance under§ 5 defines the scope of the preclearance request." See Clark, 500 U.S. at
656.
Florida's 2005 and 2011 Section 5 submissions did not identify the new citizenship list
maintenance practices initiated by the State and implemented by Supervisors of Elections under
Defendant's direction as a change being submitted for review. See Exhibits 1a, 1c, 2a, & 2c.
Further, the assertion that the Secretary's new activities are precleared because they are related to
previously precleared changes is incorrect. See McCain, 465 U.S. at 256-57. Nor has the Secretary of State made a Section 5 submission of these changes. 7 NAACP v. Hampton County
7 The State references a decision in the Northern District of Florida denying a motion for temporary restraining order against the State's program. See Order Denying a Temporary Restraining Order, United States v. Florida, 4:12-CV-285 (N.D. Fla. June 28, 2012) (see ECF 16-2). In denying the TRO, the Court explained that the doctrine of voluntary cessation created a rebuttable presumption that the challenged conduct will not recur. !d.. at 10-11. The court recognized that the State's voter verification program had "major flaws," including the fact that it "identified many properly registered citizens as potential noncitizens." Id. at 2, 9. Finally, the court noted that the list maintenance program "probably ran afoul" ofNVRA Section 8(b), 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(b), which requires state voter list maintenance programs to be "uniform" and "nondiscriminatory." Id. at 9. The decision in United States v. Florida does not address Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the implementation of the database matching program that had

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 21 PageID 156
- 13 Election Comm 'n, 470 U.S. 166, 182 (1985) ("[T]he change must be submitted 'in some unambiguous and recordable manner."') (internal citations omitted); see also 28 C.P.R. §§51.2651.28.
Nothing in Florida's 2011 submission provides that the Secretary of State can create a new non-citizen category of individuals under 98.093 for which it can "access ... information from state and federal officials and entities," see Fla. Stat. 98.093(1), distribute the results of the Department of State's data comparisons as a "source" of information that a voter is "not a United States citizen" under Fla. Stat. 98.075(6), and direct Supervisors of Elections to initiate voter removal procedures. The identified categories for the use of data obtained from "state and federal officials or entities" were unaltered in the 2011 submission. See Exhibits 2b at 15; see also Exhibit 7 (2001-1693 submission); Fla. Stat. 98.093. Because the benchmark is clearly outlined in Florida's code and its submission materials, Defendant's new practices and procedures constitute a voting change.
Neither the Attorney General's preclearance of Fla. Stat. 98.075 or 98.093, nor Defendant's assertion that it has voluntarily ceased its database comparisons, eliminate the State's responsibility to submit its new discretionary voting practices and procedures for preclearance under Section 5, as those changes have been implemented in the covered counties. See, e.g., Exhibit 3 (news article on implementation of this change in Collier County). Thus, the Secretary of State cannot now allege that the voting practice he initiated (and that the covered counties implemented at his direction), is completely abandoned, because the change has already affected voters in the covered counties. The implementation of these new practices and procedures without preclearance violates Section 5. Connor v. Waller, 421 U.S. 656 (1975) (per
already occurred in the covered counties, or the fate of the voters who were removed pursuant to that program.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 21 PageID 157
- 14curium) ("Those Acts are not now and will not be effective as laws until and unless [pre]cleared pursuant to§ 5."); see also Exhibit 4 (May 31, 2012 Letter from Department to Florida identifying unprecleared change with regards to the State's database matching program).
B. The State of Florida and Other Jurisdictions Have Submitted New Database Matching Programs for Review Pursuant to Section 5
Database matching programs are required to be submitted for Section 5 review, see, e.g., Curtis v. Smith, 121 F. Supp. 2d 1054, 1060 (E.D. Tex. 2000) (upon review of en masse challenges of residency, the court determined that "[s]uch an action, representing a change from 'more than one' to over 9,000 in one fell swoop, ·coupled with the timing of the challenges before us, must be precleared in accordance with§ 5 of the Voting Rights Act."); Order, Morales v. Handel, 1:08-CV-3172, at 21-22 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 27, 2008) (holding that the State's "comparison of information [between two] databases that results in the identification of applicants whose eligibility could not be verified" constitutes a voting change and must be submitted for Section 5 review) (Exhibit 5). And in fact, the State of Florida has previously made such submissions. See, e.g., Exhibit 1c; Exhibit 2c at 5; Exhibit 7.
In 2001, when Florida contemplated database match procedures for the removal of registered voters, the Department of Justice requested more information to identify "with specificity 'the other computer databases' ... and the 'other relevant sources' available to the State," for determining ineligibility. Exhibit 6 at 2 (Dec. 17, 2001 letter from Department to Florida). The State responded by identifying the database sources used for determining the continued eligibility of voters on the registration list. Exhibit 7 (Jan. 29, 2002letter from Florida to Department). With the additional information, the Department precleared the relevant provisions of the submission on March 28, 2002. Exhibit 8. And when Florida added the Social Security Administration as a source for conducting database comparisons to identify deceased

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 21 PageID 158
- 15 persons in 2011, the State submitted the change for Section 5 review. See Exhibit 2c at 5 (Chart prepared by Florida identifying 2011 changes).
Other covered jurisdictions have also submitted their voter database comparisons concerning citizenship for preclearance. In 2006, for example, Arizona submitted the use of the SAVE database to assist in determining eligibility of voter registration applicants. See Exhibit 9 (2006 submission from Arizona at 6). Georgia also submitted its database matching program for identifying potential non-citizens for Section 5 review following a Section 5 enforcement action; the district court in that case held that this program was a change that needed to be submitted. See Exhibit 5 at pp. 21, 22. The database matching procedures at issue here, implemented in the covered counties, require Section 5 review.
C. The State Is an Appropriate Defendant Here as the Counties Have Implemented the Change at the Direction of the State
Statewide voting changes in non-covered states that include covered jurisdictions are
subject to preclearance. See Lopez IL 525 U.S. at 282; see also Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F.
Supp. 2d 1150, 155-56 (D.S.D. 2002) (state required to submit changes affecting its two covered counties); Haith v. Martin, 618 F. Supp. 410 (E.D. N.C. 1985) (holding that state defendants in North Carolina, a partially covered state, must submit statewide voting changes for preclearance).
Here, the Florida Department of State exercised its discretion and instituted a new practice and procedure to compare the statewide voter registration database to another database for the purpose of identifying and removing voters from the voter registration list. See Exhibit 10 (April2012 PowerPoint presentation). The Florida Secretary of State has the authority to establish written practices, and the State has previously submitted written directions, practices, and procedures concerning Florida's database matching programs, similar to the one here, for

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 21 PageID 159
- 16preclearance. See, e.g., Exhibit 1c at 5-7; Exhibit 2c at 5; Wexler v. Lepore, 342 F. Supp. 2d 1097, 1099 (2004), aff'd Wexler v. Anderson, 452 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2006) ("Florida's election system consists of the Legislature, the Department of State, and the Supervisors of Elections for Florida's sixty-seven counties. Within the statutory framework governing elections, the Legislature has authorized the Department of State to issue binding interpretations of the election laws."). The Secretary of State is the appropriate state election official to submit the new citizenship list maintenance provisions on behalf of the covered counties for another practical reason-only the Secretary can fully "explain to the Attorney General the purpose and effect of voting changes it enact[ed]." See 28 C.F.R. § 51.23. In fact, all of the information regarding the development of the new citizenship list maintenance requirement is in the Secretary's control, because the county supervisors of elections in the covered jurisdictions did not develop the list maintenance practices and procedures.
D. The Matter Is Not Moot, as the Change Has Been Implemented Already The State argues that its discontinuation of the data matching procedure obviates the need to submit this change for preclearance. ECF 16 at 3, 12-13. However, the change has been implemented in covered counties, see Exhibit 3, even though preclearance has not been obtained and has already affected voters. Further, to the extent that the State now intends to implement a new data matching procedure using the Systematic Alien Verification.of Entitlement ("SAVE") federal database, see ECF 16 at pp. 12-13, that matching procedure also requires pre-clearance before it can be implemented in the covered counties. See, e.g., Exhibit 9 at 6 (State of Arizona's submission of its SAVE database matching program for new registrants).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 21 PageID 160
- 17IV. HAVA NEITHER REQUIRES THE STATE'S SPECIFIC PROGRAM NOR
EXEMPTS COMPLIANCE FROM SECTIONS'S REQUIREMENTS Congress adopted HAVA in 2002, with certain requirements about the creation and
maintenance of state-wide voter registration databases. HAVA does not require Florida's new citizenship list maintenance practices and cannot serve as the benchmark for determining whether the State has implemented a voting change. HAVA requires that states create a statewide voter registration database. 42 U.S.C. § 15483. HAVA also imposes limited list maintenance requirements for existing registrants in accordance with the established provisions of the National Voter Registration Act ("NVRA"). See 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(2)(A)-(B)(ii) ("For purposes of removing names of ineligible voters [under the NVRA], ... the State shall coordinate the computerized list with State agency records on felony status ... and death."). HAVA also requires certain steps to verify the identity of new registrants through comparisons with state driver license databases and federal Social Security databases. 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(5). By the terms of the plain text of the statute, none of these provisions ofHAVA imposes a non-discretionary duty for Florida to initiate its new citizenship list maintenance program, despite the State's arguments to the contrary. See ECF 16 at pp. 5, 7, 22. HAVA allows discretion for states to adopt more strict provisions not required or mentioned in the text of HAVA, such as citizenship verification, but it does not require it. And such discretion is the touchstone that requires preclearance under Section 5. Moreover, in any event, HAVA expressly requires compliance with the Voting Rights Act and other federal laws. 42 U.S.C. § 15484 ("The requirements established by this title are minimum requirements and nothing in this title shall be construed to prevent a State from establishing ... administration requirements that are more strict ... so long as such State requirements are not inconsistent with ... any law described
in section 906."); 42 U.S.C. § 15545(a) ("nothing in this chapter may be construed to authorize

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 21 PageID 161
- 18- ' or require conduct prohibited under" or "to supersede, restrict, or limit the application of' the Voting Rights Act, among other federal laws). See also Fordice, 520 U.S. at 284 (noting that preclearance is required even when "the changes are made in an effort to comply with federal law"); Order, Morales v. Handel, at 21 ("Though these [changes] could both be characterized as exercises of local discretion, permitted under federal and state law, in response to the federal mandate ofHAVA, this does not shield them from review under Section 5.") (Exhibit 5).
In Young v. Fordice, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the discretionary aspects of a jurisdiction's attempt to comply with a federal law mandate (in that case, the NVRA) were subject to review under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. See 520 U.S. 273, 290-91 (1997). The Court reiterated its long standing holding that "minor, as well as major, changes require preclearance ... so long as those changes reflect policy choices made by state or local officials." Id. at 284. Here, as in Young, Florida's discretionary decision to implement a new list maintenance practice and distribute the results as a "source" for detert?ining ineligibility under Fla. Stat. 98.075(6) is a change that must be submitted for review. See McDaniel v. Sanchez, 452 U.S. 130, 153 (1981) (whenever "a proposal reflect[s] the policy choices of the elected representatives of the people ... the Voting Rights Act is applicable"); Fordice, 52 U.S. at 290. Accordingly, the Department of Justice informed Florida that the changes challenged here are subject to coverage under Section 5. See Exhibit 4; see also Exhibits 1d & 2d.8 V. THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY FOR UNPRECLEARED CHANGES
The text of Section 5 is unambiguous: "unless and until" preclearance for a new voting practice is obtained from the United States District Court in the District of Columbia or the Attorney General, "no person shall be denied the right to vote for failure to comply with such"
8 The Supreme Court has observed that the Attorney General's interpretation of Section 5 is entitled to substantial deference. Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 281.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 21 PageID 162
- 19practice. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. The U.S. Supreme Court has aptly described this as the "guarantee of§ 5 that no person shall be denied the right to vote for failure to comply with an unapproved new enactment subject to § 5." Allen, 393 U.S. at 557.
As such, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a voting change that has not been precleared cannot legally be implemented. The application of Section 5 in this regard is set forth in the Supreme Court's unanimous decisions in Lopez I, 519 U.S. 9, and Clark v. Roemer, 500 U.S. 646 (1991). "A jurisdiction subject to§ 5's requirements must obtain either judicial or administrative preclearance before implementing a voting change." Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 20. "A voting change in a covered jurisdiction 'will not be effective as la[w] until and unless cleared' pursuant to one of these two methods." Clark, 500 U.S. at 652 (quoting Connor v. Waller, 421 U.S. 656 (1975)). "Failure to obtain either judicial or administrative preclearance 'renders the change unenforceable."' Id. (quoting Hathorn v. Lovorn, 457 U.S. 255, 269 (1982)). "If a voting change subject to § 5 has not been precleared, § 5 plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction prohibiting implementation of the change." Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 20; see also Clark, 500 U.S. at 652-53; Allen, 393 U.S. at 571-72.
The Court should deny the State's motion to dismiss this case. Because the unprecleared database matching program has already resulted in changes to the voter registration lists in the covered counties, a live controversy exists. VI. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the United States respectfully requests that this Court deny the State's motion to dismiss and find that Florida's new list maintenance practices and procedures must be submitted to the Department of Justice or the District Court of the District of Columbia

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 21 PageID 163

-20for Section 5 review, since they are unprecleared changes that have been implemented in the covered counties subject to Section 5.

Date: July 27, 2012

Respectfully submitted,
THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

Is/ John Albert Russ IV
T. CHRISTIAN HERREN JR JOHN ALBERT RUSS, IV California Bar No. 192471 ELISE SANDRA SHORE Georgia Bar No. 557131 JENIGH J. GARRETT New York Bar No. 4230124 Attorneys, Voting Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 305-0070 Tel: (202) 353-7738 Fax: (202) 307-3.961 j olm.russ@usdoj. gov elise.shore@usdoj. gov jenigh. garrett@usdoj. gov
Certificate of Service
I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing will be sent electronically to the registered participants (filed through EM/ECF system), on this the 27th day of July, 2012.
Is/ John Albert Russ IV
JOHN ALBERT RUSS IV Special Litigation Counsel Voting Section

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID 164
Exhibit 1a

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID 165

CIV~,~~, . u

ffm.f
IL 0

[:~_
> .

(DfilOVINS IOH

2lD5 Jut I I Alf 9: Ill

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PL-01, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050 Telephone (850) 414-3300, SunCom 994-3300 SunCom 278-4872

CHARLIE CRIST ATTORNEY GENERAL

July 5, 2005
Mr. John Tanner Chief, Voting Section Civil Rights Division Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 7254-NWB Washington, D.C. 20530

SECTION 5 SUG[vdS010N
No:JLJOE5-.!4¥{0

RE: Submission Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of Florida Legislation Passed During the 2005 Session

Dear Mr. Tanner:
Pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, and 28 C.F.R. 51, I am presenting six submissions consisting of legislation enacted during the 2005 Session. This compilation seeks your determination that these changes do not have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or language minority group.
These submissions are:
I. Chapter 2005-277. Laws of Florida, which authorizes the Secretary of State to investigate voter fraud; provides for qualifying for nomination or election by the petition process; requires that an elector in line at the time the polls close be allowed to vote; revises the Voter's Bill of Rights to authorize a provisional ballot if a person's identity is in question; provides requirements for ballots for persons with disabilities; revises the time to begin and end early voting and the time for opening and closing the early voting sites each day; revises the circumstances under which a manual recount may be ordered, and provides for additional election reform measures.

II. Chapter 2005-278. Laws of Florida, which revises the duties of the Secretary of State and the Department of State relating to election laws; revises the oath taken by a person registering to vote; revises the voter registration procedure by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles; deletes provisions relating to the second primary; establishes a statewide voter registration system; provides for contribution limits to statewide candidates; makes it a third-degree felony to participate in certain exchanges associated with voting by absentee ballots; and provides for additional related reform measures.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-1 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID 166
Mr. John Tanner Page Two
Ill. Chapter 2005-279. Laws of Florida, which revises an exemption from the public records law which is provided for information concerning persons who decline to register to vote, information relating to the place where a person registered to vote or updated a registration, and voter's signature and social security number; expands a public records exemption for the names, addresses, and telephone number of participants in the Address Confidentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence; and addresses related public records issues.
IV. Chapter 2005-286. Laws of Florida, which permanently eliminates the second primary election and revises provisions to conform to this elimination.
V. Chapter 2005-150. Laws of Florida, which provides for additional circuit judgeships embracing Hardee and Hillsborough Counties.
VI. HB 1291. Laws of Florida, which creates the Key Largo Fire Rescue and Emergency Medical Services District, a special district in Monroe County.
For the sake of clarity, these submissions follow the format of28 C.F.R. 51.27 and accompany this letter.
Sincerely,

CC/glw Enclosures

Charlie Crist

--------~ - - - - - - - -

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 26 PageID 167
Exhibit 1b

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 26 PageID 168

CHAPTER 2005-278
House Bill No. 1589
An act relating to elections; amending s. 97.012, F.S.; revising the duties ofthe Secretary ofState and the Department ofState relating to election laws; providing for rulemaking; authorizing the Secretary of State to delegate voter registration and records maintenance duties to voter registration officials; providing that the secretary has a duty to bring legal action to enforce the performance of county supervisors of elections or other officials performing duties relating to the Florida Election Code; providing a prerequisite to bringing such an action; providing venue; requiring that courts give priority to such an action; providing penalties; providing for the adoption of rules; amending s. 97.021, F.S.; revising and providing definitions; amending s. 97.026, F.S.; providing rulemaking authority to make forms available in alternative formats and via the Internet; correcting a cross-reference; amending s. 97.051, F.S.; revising the oath taken by a person registering to vote; amending s. 97.052, F.S.; requiring that the uniform statewide voter registration application be accepted for replacement of a voter information card and signature update; revising the information the uniform statewide voter registration application must contain and must elicit from the applicant; providing for the failure of a voter registration applicant to answer questions on the voter registration application; amending s. 97.053, F.S.; revising the criteria for completeness of a voter registration application; specifying the possible valid recipients of a mailed voter registration application; revising the information needed on a voter registration application to establish an applicant's eligibility; providing for verification of authenticity of certain voter registration application information; providing for a provisional ballot to be provided to an applicant if the application is not verified by a certain date; requiring a voter registration official to enter all voter registration applications into the voter registration system within a certain time period and forward such applications to the supervisor of elections; amending s. 97.0535, F.S.; providing for applicants who have no valid Florida driver's license, identification card, or social security number; amending s. 97.055, F.S.; specifying the information updates permitted for purposes of an upcoming election once registration books are closed; amending s. 97.057, F.S.; revising the voter registration procedure by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles; amending s. 97.058, F.S.; revising duties of voter registration agencies; amending s. 97.061, F.S.; revising special registration procedures for electors requiring assistance; amending s. 97.071, F.S.; redesignating the registration identification card as the voter information card; revising the required contents ofthe card; deleting provisions relating to the second primary; amending s. 97.073, F.S.; revising the procedure by which an applicant must supply missing information on the voter registration application; revising provisions relating to cancellation ofprevious registration; amending s. 97.1031, F.S.; revising provisions relating to notice of change of residence, name, or party affiliation; amending
1 CODING: Words ~are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005·278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

s. 97.105, F.S., relating to establishment of the permanent single registration system, to conform; amending s. 98.015, F.S.; revising the duties of supervisors of elections; creating s. 98.035, F.S.; establishing a statewide voter registration system; requiring the Secretary of State to be responsible for the implementation, operation, and maintenance of the system; prohibiting the department from contracting with any other entity to operate the system; authorizing the department to adopt rules relating to the access, use, and operation of the system; amending s. 98.045, F.S.; revising provisions relating to administration of voter registration; providing for the responsibility of such administration to be undertaken by the department in lieu of supervisors of elections; specifying ineligibility criteria; revising provisions relating to removal ofregistered voters; revising provisions relating to public records access and retention; providing for the establishment of a statewide electronic database of valid residential street addresses; authorizing the department to adopt rules relating to certain voter registration system forms; amending s. 98.065, F.S.; revising provisions relating to registration records maintenance; providing for change of address; providing limitations on notice and renewal; requiring supervisors of elections to certify to the department certain list maintenance activities; providing penalties; amending s. 98.075, F .S.; providing for registration records maintenance by the department; providing procedures in cases involving duplicate registration, deceased persons, adjudication of mental incapacity, felony conviction, and other bases for ineligibility; providing procedures for removal; requiring supervisors of elections to certify to the department certain registration records maintenance activities; creating s. 98.0755, F.S.; providing for appeal of a determination of ineligibility; providing for jurisdiction, burden of proof, and trial costs; amending s. 98.077, F.S.; revising provisions relating to updating a voter's signature; amending s. 98.081, F.S., relating to removal of names from the statewide voter registration system, to conform; deleting provisions relating to the second primary; amending s. 98.093, F.S.; revising the duty of officials to furnish lists of deceased persons, persons adjudicated mentally incapacitated, and persons convicted of a felony; creating 98.0981, F.S.; requiring the department to furnish certain voter information to the Legislature; amending s. 98.212, F.S., relating to furnishing of statistical and other information, to conform; amending s. 98.461, F.S.; authorizing use of an electronic database as a precinct register and use of an electronic device for voter signatures and witness initials; amending s. 100.371, F.S.; revising the procedure by which constitutional amendments proposed by initiative shall be placed on the ballot; amending s. 101.001, F.S.; revising requirements of supervisors relating to precincts and precinct boundaries; providing exceptions; amending s. 101.043, F.S.; revising requirements and procedures relating to identification required at polls; amending s. 101.045, F.S., relating to provisions for residence or name change at the polls, to conform; amending s. 101.048, F.S., relating to provisional ballots, to conform; amending s. 101.161, F.S.; conforming a cross-reference; amending s. 101.56062, F.S., re-

2 CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 26 PageID 169

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

lating to standards for accessible voting systems, to conform; amending s. 101.5608, F.S.; revising a provision relating to an elector's signature provided with identification prior to voting; creating s. 101.573, F.S.; requiring supervisors ofelections to file precinct-level election results; requiring the Department of State to adopt rules; amending s. 101.62, F.S.; conforming a cross-reference; amending ss. 101.64 and 101.657, F.S.; requiring that the supervisor of elections indicate on each absentee or early voted ballot the precinct of the voter; amending s. 101.663, F.S., relating to change of residence, to conform; amending s. 101.6921, F.S., relating to delivery ofspecial absentee ballots to certain first-time voters, to conform; amending s. 101.6923, F.S., relating to special absentee ballot instructions for certain first-time voters, to conform; amending s. 102.012, F.S., relating to conduct of elections by inspectors and clerks, to conform; amending s. 104.013, F.S., relating to unauthorized use, possession, or destruction of voter information cards, to conform; amending s. 106.0705, F.S.; providing for the timely filing of certain reports; amending s. 106.08; providing for contribution limits to statewide candidates; amending s. 106.33, F.S.; increasing certain contribution limits; amending s. 106.34, F.S.; revising provisions relating to certain candidate expenditure limits; providing a definition; amending s. 196.141, F.S., relating to homestead exemptions and duties of property appraisers, to conform; amending s. 120.54, F.S.; including certain rules pertaining to the Florida Election Code within the definition of emergency rules governing public health, safety, or welfare; amending s. 99.061, F.S.; providing the method of qualifying for nomination to the office of the state attorney or public defender; amending s. 322.142, F.S.; providing for disclosure ofcertain confidential driver's license information to the department under certain circumstances; making it a third-degree felony to participate in certain exchanges associated with voting by absentee ballot; repealing s. 104.047(1), F.S., relating to criminal penalties for partici-
pation in certain exchanges associated with voting by absentee ballot; repealing s. 98.055, F.S., relating to registration list maintenance forms; repealing s. 98.095, F.S., relating to county registers open to inspection and copies; repealing s. 98.0977, F.S., relating to the statewide voter registration database and its operation and maintenance; repealing s. 98.0979, F.S., relating to inspection of the statewide voter registration; repealing s. 98.101, F.S., relating to specifications for permanent registration binders, files, and forms; repealing s. 98.181, F.S., relating to duty of the supervisor of elections to make up indexes or records; repealing s. 98.231, F.S., relating to duty of the supervisor of elections to furnish the department the number ofregistered electors; repealing s. 98.451, F.S., relating to automation in processing registration data; repealing s. 98.481, F.S., relating to challenges to electors; repealing s. 101.635, F.S.,
relating to distribution of blocks of printed ballots; providing effective dates.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:

3 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

Section 1. Subsections (1), (2), and (11) of section 97.012, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection (14) is added to that section, to read:
97.012 Secretary of State as chief election officer.-The Secretary of State is the chiefelection officer of the state, and it is his or her responsibility to:
(1) Obtain and maintain uniformity in the 8J1Jllieatiea, 9Jl91'atiea, ami. interpretation and implementation of the election laws. In order to obtain and maintain uniformity in the internretation and implementation of the elections laws. the Department of State may. pursuant toss. 120.536(1) and 120.54. adopt by rule uniform standards for the proper and eouitable interpretation and implementation of the requirements of chapters 97 through 102 and 105 of the Election Code.
(2) Provide uniform standards for the proper and equitable implementation of the registration laws by administrative rule of the Department of State adopted pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54.
(11) Create and administer maiBtaiB a statewide voter registration~ tern as required by the Help America Vote Act of200211.atabase. The secretary may delegate voter registration duties and records maintenance activities to voter registration officials. Any resoonsibilities delegated by the secretary shall be performed in accordance with state and federal law.
(14) Bring and maintain such actions at law or in eouity bv mandamus or injunction to enforce the performance ofany duties of a county supervisor of elections or any official performing duties with respect to chapters 97 through 102 and 105 or to enforce compliance with a rule of the Deoartment of State adopted to internret or implement any of those chapters.
(a) Venue for such actions shall be in the Circuit Court of Leon County.
(b) When the secretary files an action under this section and not more than 60 days remain before an election as defined ins. 97.021 or during the time oeriod after the election and before certification of the election pursuant to s. 102.112 or s. 102.121. the court. including an aPPellate court. shall set an immediate hearing. giving the case priority over other pending cases.
(c) Prior to filing an action to enforce performance of the duties of the supervisor ofelections or any official described in this subsection. the secretary or his or her designee first must confer. or must make a good-faith attempt to confer. with the supervisor of elections or the official to ensure compliance with chapters 97 through 102 and 105 or the rules ofthe Department of State adopted under any of those chapters.
Section 2. Subsection (13) of section 97.021, Florida Statutes, is amended, present subsections (38) and (39) are renumbered as subsections (39) and (40), respectively, and a new subsection (38) is added to that section, to read:
97.021 Defmitions.-For the purposes of this code, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise, the term:

4 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 26 PageID 170

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(13) "Lists of registered electorsn means names and associated informa-
llim cet~ies ef t~:r:iated lists of registered electors maintained by the dePart-
ment in the statewide voter registration system or generated or derived from the statewide voter registration system. Lists may be produced in printed or electronic format; cemt~uter tBJ~es er disks, er ~ other de><ice ased by the swper~<iser ef eleeti9R8 te maiatam "~ter recerds.

(38) "Voter registration officiar means anY supervisor of elections or individual authorized by the Secretarv of State to accept voter registration applications and execute updates to the statewide voter registration system.
Section 3. Section 97.026, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.026 Forms to be available in alternative formats and via the lnternet.-lt is the intent of the Legislature that all forms required to be used in chapters 97-106 shall be made available upon request, in alternative formats. Such forms shall include absentee ballots as alternative formats for such ballots become available and the Division of Elections is able to certify systems that provide them. The department may. pursuant to ss. 120.536( ll and 120.54 adoot ru1es to administer this section. Whenever possible, such forms, with the exception of absentee ballots, shall be made available by the Department of State via the Internet. Sections that contain such forms include, but are not limited to, ss. 97.051, 97.052, 97.053, 97.057, 97.058, 97.0583, 97.071, 97.073, 97.1031, ~ 98.075, 99.021, 100.361, 100.371, 101.045, 101.171, 101.20, 101.6103, 101.62, 101.64, 101.65, 101.657, 105.031, 106.023, and 106.087.

Section 4. Section 97.051, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.051 Oath upon registering.-A person registering to vote must subscribe to the following oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State ofFlorida, that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida, and that all information provided in this application is true I am a Gitiaea ef the tmited States aad a legal resiaeat ef "Fle:r:iaa."

Section 5. Section 97.052, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 97.052 Uniform statewide voter registration application.-
(!) The department shall prescribe l2v....rYJ& a uniform statewide voter
registration application for use in this state. (a) The uniform statewide voter registration application must be ac-
cepted for any one or more of the following purposes: 1. Initial registration.

2. Change of address.

3. Change of party affiliation.

5 CODING: Words eWke& are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

4. Change of name. 5. Replacement of J! voter information registratiea ideatifi.catiBR card. 6. Signature uodate. (b) The department is responsible for printing the uniform statewide voter registration application and the voter registration application form
prescribed by the ~ Election Assistance Commission pursuant to M
erallaw the Natieaal 17ater Registratiea Act ef 1993. The applications and forms must be distributed, upon request, to the following:
1. Individuals seeking to register to vote or update a voter registration record.
2. Individuals or groups conducting voter registration programs. A charge of 1 cent per application shall be assessed on requests for 10,000 or more applications.
3. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. 4. Voter registration agencies. 5. Armed forces recruitment offices. 6. Qualifying educational institutions. 7. Supervisors, who must make the applications and forms available in the following manner: a. By distributing the applications and forms in their offices to any individual or group. b. By distributing the applications and forms at other locations designated by each supervisor.
c. By mailing the applications and forms to applicants upon the request of the applicant.
(c) The uniform statewide voter registration application may be reproduced by any private individual or group, provided the reproduced application is in the same format as the application prescribed by rule under this section.

(2) The uniform statewide voter registration application must be designed to elicit the following information from the applicant:
(a) Last. first. and middle ~ name, including any suffix. (b) Date of birth. (c) Address of legal residence. (d) Mailing address, if different.

6 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 26 PageID 171

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(e) County of legal residence.
(Q ~.&dFeSS efprepeFt~· :19r wiHsa tae llflfllisaBt &as seea gFBBted a aeme stead eKemt~tiea, if aay
ill(g} Race or ethnicity that best describes the applicant:
1. American Indian or Alaskan Native.
2. Asian or Pacific Islander.
3. Black, not Hispanic.
4. White, not Hispanic.
5. Hispanic.
.(g}(hl State or country of birth.
.(hl(i) Sex.
ill(;j} Party affiliation.
.ill(k} Whether the applicant needs assistance in voting.
{hl(» Name and address where last registered. ill(mt Last four digits of the applicant's social security number. {m1(a) Florida driver's license number or the identification number from a Florida identification card issued under s. 322.051. (n) An indication. if applicable that the applicant has not been issued a Florida driver's license a Florida identification card or a social security number.
(o) Telephone number (optional). (p) Signature of applicant under penalty for false swearing pursuant to s. 104.011, by which the person subscribes to the oath required by s. 3, Art. VI of the State Constitution and s. 97.051, and swears or affirms that the information contained in the registration application is true. (q) Whether the application is being used for initial registration, to update a voter registration record, or to request a replacement voter informa-
llim Fegistratiea ideatifisatiea card.
(r) Whether the applicant is a citizen of the United States by asking the question "Are you a citizen of the United States of America?" and providing boxes for the applicant to check to indicate whether the applicant is or is not a citizen of the United States.
(s) Whether ~ the applicant has Bet been convicted of a felony and er, if convicted, has had his or her civil rights restored by including the
statement "I affirm I am not a convicted felon or ifl am my rights relating

7 CODING: Words sWke& are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2()()5..278

to voting have been restored." and providing a box for the applicant to check to affirm the statement.
(t) Whether !J;Rat the applicant has Bat been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting or, ifso adjudicated, has had his or her right to vote restored by including the statement "I affirm I have not been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting or. ifl have. my competency has been restored." and providing a box for the applicant to check to affirm the statement.

The registration aPPlication fGrm must be in plain language and designed so that convicted felons whose civil rights have been restored and persons who have been adjudicated mentally incapacitated and have had their voting rights restored are not required to reveal their prior conviction or adjudication.
(3) The uniform statewide voter registration application must also contain:
(a) The oath required by s. 3, Art. VI of the State Constitution and s. 97.051.
(b) A statement specifying each eligibility requirement under s. 97.041.
(c) The penalties provided ins. 104.011 for false swearing in connection with voter registration.
(d) A statement that, if an applicant declines to register to vote, the fact that the applicant has declined to register will remain confidential and may be used only for voter registration purposes.
(e) A statement that informs the applicant who chooses to register to vote or update a voter registration record that the office at which the applicant submits a voter registration application or updates a voter registration record will remain confidential and may be used only for voter registration purposes.
{Q A statemeat tRat infeFmS tae llflfllisaat tRat &By peFSQB "'RQ aas seea gFaated a &emestead eKeiRJitiea ia tRis state, aBd "'Re FegisteFS te "ete iD aay f!FeSinst etReF tRaa tRe eae ia mhisa tRe J!FepeJ'i¥ fer VlzRisR tRe aeme stead el!:eiBfltiea Ras seeR granted, SRalJ. aaue tRat iBfeFmatiea ffiFVI•araed te tRe f!Fepe~· &flf!Faiser "<heFe sass f!Fef!el'ty is lesated, v.r.Aisa may Fesalt ia tRe f!eFSea's ReiB9Stead Bli:BIRJ!tiea seiag termiaated aad tRe fiBFSQB seffig sahjest te assessmeat efsask taxes Ynder s 1Q3 OQ:l, aaless tRe aemestead gF&Bted tRe eli:S~RJ~tiea is seiDg maintaiaed as tRe f!eFmaaeat residease ef a legal er aataral det~eadeat ef tae 9'i¥aer aad tRe 9VIr-Ber Fesides else"<here
ill(g} A statement informing an tRe applicant who has not been issued a Florida driver's license a Florida identification card. or a social security number that if the application fGrm is submitted by mail and the applicant is registering for the first time in this state the applicant will be required to provide identification prior to voting the first time.

8 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 26 PageID 172

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2()()5..278

(4) A supervisor may produce a voter registration application that has the supervisor's direct mailing address if the department has reviewed the application and determined that it is substantially the same as the uniform statewide voter registration application.
(5) The voter registration application form prescribed by the ~ Election Assistance Commission pursuant to federal law the NaiillRal"eteF RegistFatiea 1\Gt of 1993 or the federal postcard application must be accepted as an application for registration in this state if the completed application or postcard application contains the information required by the constitution and laws of this state.
(6) If a voter registration applicant fails to proyide any of the required information on the voter registration aPPlication form the supervisor shall notify the applicant of the failure by mail within 5 business days after the supervisor has the information available in the voter registration system. The applicant shall have an opportunity to complete the application form to vote in the next election up until the book closing for that next election.
Section 6. Section 97.053, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.053 Acceptance of voter registration applications.-
(1) Voter registration applications, changes in registration, and requests for a replacement voter information 1'8gistFatiea iEieatifisatiea card must be accepted in the office of any supervisor, the division, a driver license office, a voter registration agency, or an armed forces recruitment office when hand delivered by the applicant or a third party during the hours that office is open or when mailed.
(2) A semjlleteEI voter registration application is complete and that sOB tains the iBfeFmatiea aesessaF;Y to esta91ish 1m ajljllisaat's eligil!ility jlaFBa aat te s. 97.041 becomes the official voter registration record of that applicant when all information necessary to establish the applicant's eligibilitv pursuant to s. 97.041 is received by a voter registration official and verified pursuant to subsection (6) the ajlflF9jlriate SQjle:R<iseF. If the applicant fails to complete his or her voter registration application prior to the date of book closing for an election. then such applicant shall not be eligible to vote in that election.
(3) The registration date for a valid initial voter registration application that has been hand delivered is the date that the application is whea received by a driver license office, a voter registration agency, an armed forces recruitment office, the division, or the office of any supervisor in the state.
(4) The registration date for a valid initial voter registration application that has been mailed to a driver license office. a voter registration agency. an armed forces recruitment office the division or the office of any supervisor in the state and bears a clear postmark is the date of that the postmark. Ifan initial voter registration application that has been mailed does not bear a postmark or if the postmark is unclear, the registration date is the date the application 1'8gistl'atiea is received by any supervisor or the division, unless it is received within 5 days after the closing of the books for an

9 CODING: Words sWkeB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

election, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, in which case the registration date is the book-closing date.
(5)(a) A voter registration application is complete if it contains the following information necessary to establish the applicant's eligibility pursuant to s. 97.041. including:
1. The applicant's name.
2. The applicant's legal residence address.
3. The applicant's date of birth.
4. A mark in the checkbox affirming J..n iadieaiiea that the applicant is a citizen of the United States.
5.JL. The applicant's current and valid Florida driver's license number 2r:; the identification number from a Florida identification card issued under s. 322.051, or
b. If the applicant has not been issued a cuuent and valid Florida driv-
er's license or a Florida identification card. the last four digits of the applicant's social security number.

In case an applicant has not been issued a current and valid Florida driver's license, Florida identification card. or social security number. the applicant shall affirm this fact in the manner prescribed in the uniform statewide voter registration application.
6. A mark in the checkbox affirming "a iBdisaiiea that the applicant has not been convicted of a felony or that, if convicted, has had his or her civil rights restored.
7. A mark in the checkbox affirming "a iadisatiOB that the applicant has not been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting or that, if so adjudicated, has had his or her right to vote restored.
8. The original signature or a digital signature transmitted by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles of the applicant swearing or affirming under the penalty for false swearing pursuant to s. 104.011 that the information contained in the registration application is true and subscribing to the oath required by s. 3, Art. VI of the State Constitution and s. 97.051.
(b) An applicant who fails to designate party affiliation must be registered without party affiliation. The supervisor must notify the voter by mail that the voter has been registered without party affiliation and that the voter may change party affiliation as provided ins. 97.1031.
(6) A voter registration aPPlication may be accepted as valid only after the department has verified the authenticity or nonexistence of the driver's license number. the Florida identification card number. or the last four digits of the social security number provided by the aPPlicant. Ifa completed

10 CODING: Words sWkeB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 26 PageID 173

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2005-278

voter registration application has been received by the book-closing deadline but the driver's license number the Florida identification card number or the last four digits of the social security number provided by the applicant cannot be verified prior to the applicant presenting himselfor herselfto vote. the applicant shall be provided a provisional ballot. The provisional ballot shall be counted only ifthe application is verified by the end ofthe canvassing period or ifthe annlicant presents evidence to the supervisor of elections sufficient to verify the authenticitv of the driver's license number Florida identification card number. or last four digits of the social security number provided on the application no later than 5 p.m. of the third day following the election.
(7) All voter registration applications received by a voter registration official shall be entered into the statewide voter registration system within 15 days after receipt. Once entered. the application shall be immediately forwarded to the appropriate sunervisor of elections.
Section 7. Subsections (1), (2), and (3) of section 97.0535, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
97.0535 Special requirements for certain applicants.-
(!) Each applicant who registers by mail and who has never previously voted in the state and who the department has verified has not been issued a current and valid Florida driver's license Florida identification card or social security number~ shall be required to provide a copy of a current and valid identification, as provided in subsection (3), or indicate that he or she is exempt from the requirements prior to voting. Such 'nle 8f1plisant mfi¥ pF9'tiae the identification or indication may be provided at the time of registering, or at any time prior to voting for the first time in the ~ GeYBty. If the voter registration application clearly provides information from which a voter registration official the supe!"<iser can determine that the applicant meets at least one of the exemptions in subsection (4), the voter registration officialsupePJiser shall make the notation on the registration records of the statewide voter registration system and the applicant shall not be required to provide the identification reouired by this section further infermatiea that is relf'Ylrell. effirst time "eters ·v.he register lly mail.
(2) The voter registration official supel"<iser ef elestieas shall, upon accepting the voter registration application submitted pursuant to subsection
i l l fer an &fiJIHGant wha registered b;y mail ana ".J!.e haB Ret JIF9''4eusly "etea
ia the serm~, determine if the applicant provided the required identification at the time ofregistering. Ifthe required identification was not provided, the supervisor shall notify the applicant that he or she must provide the identification prior to voting the first time in the state ~·
(3Xa) The following forms of identification shall be considered current and valid ifthey contain the name and photograph ofthe applicant and have not expired:
1. ~erill.a ll.rWer's lisease.

11 CODING: Words stAekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2005-278

2 ~erill.a ill.eatifisatiea sara issued by the I)epartmeat ef Hig.h>"ay Safety ana Meter Vehisles.
L~ United States passport.
~4.. Employee badge or identification.
Q.,&. Buyer's club identification.
!,.9. Debit or credit card.
f!./h Military identification.
jh&. Student identification.
1..,.9. Retirement center identification.
~-10. Neighborhood association identification.
11. Eatertaiameat ill.eatifisatiea
~-12. Public assistance identification.
(b) The following forms of identification shall be considered current and valid if they contain the name and current residence address of the applicant:
1. Utility bill.
2. Bank statement.
3. Govemment check.
4. Paycheck.
5. Other govemment document (excluding voter identification card).
Section 8. Subsection (1) of section 97.055, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.055 Registration books; when closed for an election.-
(1) The registration books must be closed on the 29th day before each election and must remain closed until after that election. If an election is called and there are fewer than 29 days before that election, the registration books must be closed immediately. When the registration books are closed for an election, only updates to a voter's name. address, and signature pursuant to ss. 98.077 and 101.045 will be oormitted for purnoses of the upcoming election. Voter registration applications and party changes must be accepted but only for the purpose ofsubsequent elections. However, party changes received between the book-closing date ofthe first primary election and the date of the second primary election are not effective until after the second primary election.
Section 9. Section 97.057, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

12 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 26 PageID 174

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2()()5..278

97.057 Voter registration by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.-
(1) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall provide the opportunity to register to vote or to update a voter registration record to each individual who comes to an office of that department to:
(a) Apply for or renew a driver's license;
(b) Apply for or renew an identification card pursuant to chapter 322; or
(c) Change an address on an existing driver's license or identification card.
(2) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall:
(a) Notify each individual, orally or in writing, that:
1. Information gathered for the completion of a driver's license or identification card application, renewal, or change of address can be automatically transferred to a voter registration application;
2. Ifadditional information and a signature are provided, the voter registration application will be completed and sent to the proper election authority;
3. Information provided can also be used to update a voter registration record;
4. All declinations will remain confidential and may be used only for voter registration purposes; and
5. The particular driver license office in which the person applies to register to vote or updates a voter registration record will remain confidential and may be used only for voter registration purposes.
(b) Require a driver's license examiner to inquire orally, or. if the applicant is hearing impaired. inquire in writing if tae appliGaDt is aeaJ'ing impaiFell, aad whether the applicant wishes to register to vote or update a voter registration record during the completion ofa driver's license or identification card application, renewal, or change of address.
1. Ifthe applicant chooses to register to vote or to update a voter registration record:
a. All applicable information received by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles in the course of filling out the forms necessary under subsection (1) must be transferred to a voter registration application~t
b. The additional necessary information must be obtained by the driver's license examiner and must not duplicate any information already obtained while completing the forms required under subsection (1)~.:...aa4
c. A voter registration application with all of the applicant's voter registration information required to establish the applicant's eligibility pursuant

13 CODING: Words stAekel> are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005·278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2()()5..278

to s. 97.041 must be presented to the applicant to review and verify the voter registration information received and provide an electronic signature affirming the accuracy of the information provided siga.
2. If the applicant declines to register to vote, update the applicant's voter registration record, or change the applicant's address by either orally declining or by failing to sign the voter registration application, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles must note such declination on its records and shall forward the declination to the statewide voter registration svstem keep the deGlinatiBR fuF :l yeaFB hut must fo~·am a S9J1:Y llfthe rmsigaed ueteF FegistFatiBR appliGatiea within 5 Qll:}'S afteF FeGeipt te the 8JIJIFepFiate SYJieFir.iSeF ef elesti.BRS.
(3) For the purpose of this section, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, with the approval of the Department of State, shall prescribe:
(a) A voter registration application that is the same in content, format, and size as the uniform statewide voter registration application prescribed under s. 97.052; and
(b) A form that will inform applicants under subsection (1) of the information contained in paragraph (2Xa).
(4) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles must electronically transmit~ completed voter registration applications within 24 hours after receipt to the statewide voter registration system. Completed paper voter registration applications received by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall be forwarded within 5 days after receipt to the supervisor of the county where the office that processed or received that application is located.
(5) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles must send, with each driver's license renewal extension application authorized pursuant to s. 322.18(8), a uniform statewide voter registration application, the voter registration application prescribed under paragraph (3Xa), or a voter registration application developed especially for the purposes ofthis subsection by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, with the approval of the Department of State, which must meet the requirements of s. 97.052.
(6) A person providing voter registration services for a driver license office may not:
(a) Seek to influence an applicant's political preference or party registration;
(b) Display any political preference or party allegiance;
(c) Make any statement to an applicant or take any action the purpose or effect of which is to discourage the applicant from registering to vote; or
(d) Disclose any applicant's voter registration information except as needed for the administration of voter registration.

14 CODING: Words stAekel> are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 26 PageID 175

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(7) 'I!ae :DetJ&I'tmi!BI; ef llighmay Safety aad llllet81' 17ehisles shall sel!lflile lists, "by seYB~, ef these iBdiuidaals whese Rames h!v·e "beeR IJIH'geB fFQm its BR"I!F's liseRse datahase hesB\lSe they haue "beeR liseRsed iR aaetl1.eF
state aad shalltJFD"ide tl!.ese lists BPnnall3· te the Bllf!FetJI'iate S\ltJerNiseFs
~ The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall collect data determined necessary by the Department of State for program evaluation and reporting to the ¥edeFal Election Assistance Commission pursuant to federal law the NatieBal 1 lateF RegistFatieB 4 st ef 1993.
(lil(9) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles must ensure that all voter registration services provided by driver license offices are in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
(9) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall retain complete records of voter registration information received. processed and submitted to the statewide voter registration system by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. These records shall be for the exnlicit purpose of supporting audit and accounting controls established to ensure accurate and complete electronic transmission of records between the statewide voter registration system and the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
(10) The department shall proyide the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles with an electronic database ofstreet addresses valid for use as the legal residence address as required in s. 97.053(5). The Department of Highway Safetv and Motor Vehicles shall compare the acidress provided by the applicant against the database of valid street addresses. If the address provided by the aPPlicant does not match a valid street address in the database the applicant will be asked to verifv the address provided. The Department ofHighway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall not reiect any application for voter registration for which a valid match cannot be made.
(11) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall enter into an agreement with the department to match information in the statewide voter registration system with information in the database of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to the extent reauired to verify the accuracy of the driver's license number. Florida identification number. or last four digits ofthe social security number provided on applications for voter registration as required in s. 97.053.
(12) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Social Security as required by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to verifv the last four digits of the social security number provided in applications for voter registration as required in s. 97.053.
Section 10. Subsections (6), (7), and (9) of section 97.058, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
97.058 Voter registration agencies.-
(6) A voter registration agency must forward all completed and incom-
o!m& voter registration applications within 5 days after receipt to the super-

15 CODING: Words sWkea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

visor ofthe county where the agency that processed or received that application is located.
(7) A voter registration agency must retain declinations for a period of 2 years, during which time the declinations are not considered a record of the client pursuant to the laws governing the agency's records. IIEV"I!''eF, a •,•eteF FegHJtFati9B ageRsy IB\lBt fel"oo'aN a GetJy 9f easa iBsemtJieted "~tel' FSgiStFatieR BlltlHC!atieB 'llr-itRiR 5 QayB aftel' 1'9GeitJt te ti!.e BtJIJFetJI'iate S\ltJeF viseF ef eleetieas.
(9) A voter registration agency must collect data determined necessary by the department. as provided by rule. for program evaluation and reporting to the ¥elleFal Election Assistance Commission pursuant to federal law the NatieRal 'JeteF Registl'atieB 4 st ef 1993.
Section 11. Section 97.061, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.061 Special registration for electors requiring assistance.-
(!) Any person who is eligible to register and who is unable to read or write or who, because of some disability, needs assistance in voting shall upon that person's request be registered hy tl!.e S\ltJeFViBeF under the procedure prescribed by this section and shall be entitled to receive assistance at the polls under the conditions prescribed by this section. The department may adopt rules to administer this section.
(2) If a person is qualified to register pursuant to this section, the voter registration official satJei'ViseF shall note in that person's registration record that the person needs assistance in voting.
(3) The precinct register generated by the supervisor shall contain~ Fegistel'iag aay tJ8Fsea ll\li'S\lBBt te tais sestieR, the S\lllel'l'iseF IB\lBt make a notation eR tae 1'9gistFatieR heeks 81' 1'9G9Fds "'Dish BFe deliueFed te the ~Jells ea elestiea day that such person is eligible for assistance in voting, and the supervisor may issae sallh peFSeR a StJesial 1'9gistFatieR ideatiiisatiea ~ make a seme notation on the voter information Fe~IBF 1'9gistntieR ideRtiasatieR card that such person is eligible for assistance in voting. Such person shall be entitled to receive the assistance of two election officials or some other person ofhis or her own choice, other than the person's employer, the agent of the person's employer, or an officer or agent of the person's union, without the necessity of executing the "Declaration to Secure Assistance" prescribed ins. 101.051. Such person shall notify the supervisor ofany change in his or her condition which makes it unnecessary for him or her to receive assistance in voting.
Section 12. Section 97.071, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.071 Voter information RegistFatieR ideRtiasatieR card.-
(1) A voter information FegistFatieR ideatiasatieR card shall m\lSt be furnished by the supervisor to all registered voters residing in the supervisor's county. The card Fegistel'iRg nndeF the IJ9Fmaaeat siagle FegistFatieR system and must contain:

16 CODING: Words sWkea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 26 PageID 176

Ch. 2006-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2006-278

(a) Voter's registration number. (b) Date of registration. (c) Full name. (d) Party affiliation. (e) Date of birth.
<0 Rase er etb·lillity, if JlFevitletl lly the a}l}llisant.
(g) Sex, if }lreu;iaetl lly the applis&Bt ffi(hl Address of legal residence. {glW Precinct number. {hXff Name of supervisor and contact information of supervisor. (k} I!lase f9r "eteF's sigBature.
tiW Other information deemed necessary by the su,pervisor tlep!Htmeat.
(2) A voter may receive a replacement voter information efa registratiea itleatifisatiea card by providing a signed, written request for a replacement card to a voter registration official the SQ}leP<iser. Upon verification of registration, the supervisor shall issue the voter a duplicate card without charge.
(3) In the case of a change of name, address, or party affiliation, the supervisor §hlilliiiUSi issue the voter a new Voter information registratiea itleatiasatiea card. However, a voter information registratiea itleBtifisatieB card indicating a party affiliation change made between the book-dosing date for the l'ir.st primary election and the date of the B9G9Bd primary election may not be issued until after the 8EKl8Bii primary election.
Section 13. Section 97.073, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 97.073 Disposition of voter registration applications; cancellation notice.(1) The supervisor must notify each applicant of the disposition of the applicant's voter registration application. The notice must inform the applicant that the application has been approved, is incomplete, has been denied, or is a duplicate of a current registration. A voter information registratiea itleatiiisatiea card sent to an applicant constitutes notice of approval of registration. If the application is incomplete, the supervisor must request that the applicant supply the missing information using a voter registration
application signed by the applicant mw~itiag ana sigB a statemeat that the
atltlitieaal iaf9rmatiea is trae aatl serrest. A notice ofdenial must inform the applicant of the reason the application was denied.
(2) Within 2 weeks after approval of a voter registration application that indicates that the applicant was previously registered in another statejarisdietiea, the department sapel"'>iser must notify the registration official in

17 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2006-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2006-278

the prior state jllristliGtieB that the applicant is now registered in this state the sa}leF\<iseF's seYBty.
Section 14. Section 97.1031, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.1031 Notice of change of residence n<itam the same seaaty, change of name, or change of party affiliation.-
(!) When an elector moves from the address named on that person's voter registration record to another address within the same county, the elector must provide notification of such move to the supervisor of elections of that county. The elector may provide the supervisor a signed, written notice or may notify the supervisor by telephone or electronic means. However, notification of such move other than by signed, written notice must include the
elector's date of birth. An elector may also provide notification to other voter
recistration officials as provided in subsection (2). Avoter information l'egistratiea itleatifisatiea card reflecting the new information address ef legal residease shall be issued to the elector as provided in subsection ~-
(2) When an elector moves from the address named on that person's voter registration record to another address in a different county but within the state. the elector seeks to change party affiliation. or the name of an elector is changed by marriage or other legal process, the elector shall masi provide notice a sigaetl, wt=ittea aetiiisatiea of such change to a voter registration official using a voter registration aPPlication signed by the elector. A voter information the sQ}lerviser ana elltaia a registratiea itleatiasatiea card reflecting the new information shall be issued to the elector as provided in subsection (3) BIHBe.
(3} U~Qea an elester seeks te Ghaage }lariy aft'Hiatiea, the elester mast p-,ritle a sigaetl, "l'rittea aetiasatiea ef sash inteat te the sapel'l<iser aatl ehlaia a registYMilm itleatifisatiea sara reilelltiag the aew party affiliatiea, salljest te the iss\lanse restristiea in s 97 071(3}
Gll(4} The voter registration official sapi!F\'iser shall make the necessary changes in the elector's records as soon as practical upon receipt of such notice of a change of address of legal residence, name, or party affiliation~ The supervisor of elections aBtl shall issue the new voter information l'egistratiea itleatiasatiea card as re~t'lliretl lly s 97.071(3}.
Section 15. Section 97.105, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.105 Permanent single registration system established.-A permanent single registration system for the registration of electors to qualify them to vote in all elections is provided for the several counties and municipalities. This system shall be put into use by all municipalities and shall be in lieu of any other system of municipal registration. Electors shall be registered pursuant to iR jl\lFS\lanGe ef this system by a voter registration official the sapemser er lly a tlep\lty BQ}Jel'l<iser, and electors registered shall not thereafter be required to register or reregister except as provided by law.
Section 16. Subsections (3), (10), and (11) of section 98.015, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection (12) is added to that section, to read:

18
CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 26 PageID 177

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

98.015 Supervisor of elections; election, tenure of office, compensation, custody of books, office hours, successor, seal; appointment of deputy supervisors; duties.-
(3) The supervisor shall uPdate voter registration information enter new voter registrations into the statewide voter registration system. and act as is the official custodian of documents receiyed by the supervisor related to the registration of electors and changes in voter registration status of electors of the supervisor's county tae Fegistl:atiea lleeks aaa aas tae eKelasine eeat:Fel ef mattel'll Jleltaiai.Rg te Fegistl:atiea ef eleet91'1l.
(10) Each supervisor §b.Jill ~ensure that all voter registration and list maintenance procedures conducted by such supervisor are in compliance with any applicable requirements prescribed by rule of the department
through the statewide voter registration system or prescribed by ~
eennt¥ nnaer the Voting Rights Act of 1965. the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. or the Help America Vote Act of 2002.
(11) Each supervisor shall ensure that any voter registration system used by the supervisor for administering his or her duties as a voter registration official complies with the specifications and procedures established by rule of the department and the statewide voter registration system EaeR SQ}le~<iser ef eleetieas saall mF1"arG te tQe JlFeJleAy aJl}lFaiSeF fer tae eeani;y ia •A<Riea the aemesteaa is elaimea the aame ef the Jlel'!lea aaa the aaaFess ef tQe aem.esteaa ef eaea JleFSQR WDe Fegistel'll te "ete at aD aGGreSS ether thaa taat at ·vllieh the Jlersea elaims a aemesteaa eKem}ltiea, as aiselesea ea the animrm statl!'l1<iae "eter Fegistl:atiea at~lllieatiea IIYFBaaat te s ~-
(12) Each supervisor shall maintain a list ofvalid residential street addresses for purposes of verifying the legal addresses ofvoters residing in the supervisor's county. The supervisor shall make all reasonable efforts to coordinate with county 911 service providers. property appraisers. the United States Postal Service or other agencies as necessary to ensure the continued accuracy ofsuch list. The supervisor shall provide the list ofvalid residential addresses to the statewide voter registration system in the manner and frequency specified by rule of the department.
Section 17. Section 98.035, Florida Statutes, is created to read:
98.035 Statewide voter registration system: implementation. operation. and maintenance.-
( 1) The Secretarv of State. as chief election officer of the state. shall be responsible for implementing. operating. and maintaining in a uniform and nondiscriminatory manner a single. uniform official centralized interactive. computerized statewide voter registration system as required by the Help America Vote Act of2002. The department may adopt rules to administer this section.
(2) The statewide voter registration system must contain the name and registration information of every legally registered voter in the state. All voters shall be assigned a unique identifier. The system shall be the official

19 CODING: Words ~are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

list of registered voters in the state and shall provide secured access by authorized voter registration officials. The system shall enable voter registration officials to provide access. and undate voter registration information.
(3) The department may not contract with any other entity for the operation of the statewide voter registration system.
(4) The implementation of the statewide voter registration system shall not prevent any supervisor of elections from acquiring, maintaining, or using any hardware or software necessarv or desirable to cam out the supervisor's responsibilities related to the use ofvoter registration information or the conduct of elections. provided that such hardware or software does not conflict with the operation of the statewide voter registration system.
(5) The department may adopt rules governing the access. use and operation of the statewide voter registration system to ensure security uniformity and integrity of the system.
Section 18. Section 98.045, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.045 Administration of voter registration.-
(!) ELIGIBILITY OF APPLICANT.-The EaGa supervisor must ensure
that any eligible applicant for voter registration is registered to vote and
that each application for voter registration is processed in accordance with law. The supervisor shall determine whether a voter registration applicant is ineligible based on any of the following:
(a) The failure to complete a voter registration application as specified ins. 97.053.
(b) The aPPlicant is deceased.
(c) The applicant has been convicted of a felony for which his or her civil rights have not been restored.
(d) The applicant has been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to the right to vote and such right has not been restored.
(e) The applicant does not meet the age requirement pursuant to s. 97.041.
(f) The applicant is not a United States citizen.
(g) The applicant is a fictitious person.
(h) The applicant has provided an address of legal residence that is not his or her legal residence.
(i) The applicant has provided a driver's license number. Florida identification card number. or the last four digits of a social security number that is not verifiable by the department.

20
CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 26 PageID 178

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2005-278

(2) REMOVAL OF REGISTERED VOTERS.-
W Once a voter is registered, the name ofthat voter may not be removed
from the statewide voter registration system 9e9ks except at the written request of the voter, by reason of the voter's conviction of a felony or adjudication as mentally incapacitated with respect to voting, by death of the voter, or pursuant to a registration list maintenance JIFegFam er ethor rogis tratiea list maiateaaaee activity conducted pursuant to s. 98.065 2!J s. 98.075, 9F S 98 0977.
~ Information received by a voter registration official SIIJieiViser from an election official in another~ jw:i.saistiea indicating that a~ ~voter in this state the SIIJieFI>iser's se'llRI?' has registered to vote in that other ~ jw:i.saistiea shall be considered as a written request from the voter to have the voter's name removed from the statewide voter registration system ll99ks ef the SIIJieF¥iser's eeYR~?r.
(3) PUBLIC RECORDS ACCESS AND RETENTION. l>letl•>itllStana iag the pr9\'isieas ef ss 98 095 aaa 98 097'1, Each supervisor shall maintain for at least 2 years, and make available for public inspection and copying, all records concerning implementation ofregistration list maintenance programs and activities conducted pursuant to ss. 98.065 ru!ll, 98.075;--aaQ ~. The records must include lists of the name and address of each person to whom l! aB address senfi.rmatiea fi.aal notice was sent and information as to whether each such person responded to the mailing, but may not include any information that is confidential or exempt from public records requirements under this code.
(4) STATEWIDE ELECTRONIC DATABASE OF VALID RESIDENTIAL STREET ADDRESSES.-
(a) The deyartment shall compile and maintain a statewide electronic database ofvalid residential street addresses from the information provided by the supervisors of elections pursuant to s. 98.015. The department shall evaluate the information provided by the supervisors of elections to identify any duplicate addresses and any address that may overlap county boundaries.
(b) The department shall make the statewide database of valid street addresses available to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles as provided in s. 97.057(10). The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall use the database for purposes of validating the legal residential addresses provided in voter registration applications received by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
(5) FORMS.-The department may prescribe by rule forms necessarv to conduct maintenance of records in the statewide voter registration system.
Section 19. Section 98.065, Florida Statutes, as amended by chapter 2002-281, Laws of Florida, is amended to read:
98.065 Registration list maintenance programs.-

21 CODING: Words stRekes are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(1) The supervisor must conduct a general registration list maintenance program to protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records in the state· wide voter registration system. The program must be uniform, nondiscrimi· natory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. and the Help America Vote Act of 2002. As used in this subsection, the term "nondiscriminatory" applies to and in· eludes persons with disabilities.
(2) A supervisor must incorporate one or more ofthe following procedures in the supervisor's biennial registration list maintenance program under which:
(a) Change-of-address information supplied by the United States Postal Service through its licensees is used to identify registered voters whose addresses might have changed;
(b) Change-of-address information is identified from returned nonforwardable return-if-undeliverable mail sent to all registered voters in the county; or
(c) Change-of-address information is identified from returned nonforwardable return-if-undeliverable address confirmation requests mailed to all registered voters who have not voted in the last 2 years and who did not make a written request that their registration records be updated during that time.
(3) A registration list maintenance program must be conducted by each supervisor, at a minimum, in each odd-numbered year and must be completed not later than 90 days prior to the date of any federal election. All list maintenance actions llSSociated with each voter must be entered tracked and maintained in the statewide voter registration system.
(4Xa) If the supervisor receives change-of-address information pursuant
to the activities conducted in subsection (2). from iurv notices simed by the
voter and returned to the courts. from the Department of Highway Safetv and Motor Vehicles. or from other sources. which information indicates that the legal address of a registered voter might have changed. the supervisor shall send by forwl!rdable return-if-undeliverable mail an address confirmation notice to the address at which the voter was last registered. A supervisor may also send an address confirmation notice to any voter who the supervisor has reason to believe has moved from his or her legal residence.
(b) The address confirmation notice shall contain a postage prepaid preaddressed return form on which:
1. If the voter has changed his or her address of le@l residence to a location outside the state. the voter shall mark that the voter's legal residence has changed to a location outside the state. The form shl!ll also include information on how to register in the new state in order to be eligible to vote. The form must be returned within 30 days after the date of the notice. The completed form shall constitute a request to be removed from the statewide voter registration system.

22 CODING: Words siAeloeB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 26 PageID 179

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

2. If the voter has changed his or her address of legal residence to a

location inside the state. the voter shall set forth the undated or corrected

address and submit the return form within 30 days after the date of the

notice. The completed form shall constitute a request to update the state-

wide voter registration system with the updated or corrected address infor-

I

mation.

3. If the voter has not changed his or her address of legal residence as

·1

printed on the address confirmation notice. the voter shall confirm that his or her address oflegal residence has not changed and submit the form within

30 davs after the date of the notice.

(c) The supervisor must designate as inactive all voters who have been
sent an address confirmation notice and who have not returned the postage prepaid preaddressed return form within 30 days or for which an address confirmation notice has been returned as undeliverable. Names on the inactive list may not be used to calculate the number of signatures needed on any petition. A voter on the inactive list may be restored to the active list of voters upon the voter updating his or her registration requesting an absentee ballot. or appearing to vote. However. if the voter does not undate his or her voter registration information. request an absentee ballot. or vote by the second general election after being placed on the inactive list the voter's name shall be removed from the statewide voter registration system and the voter shall be required to reregister to have his or her name restored to the statewide voter registration system.

(5) A notice may not be issued pwsuant to this section and a voter's name
may not be removed from the statewide voter registration svstem later than 90 days prior to the date of a federal election. However this section does not
preclude the removal of the name of a voter from the statewide voter regis-
tration system at any time upon the voter's written request. by reason ofthe
voter's death or upon a determination of the voter's ineligibility as provided
in s. 98.075(7).

(6Xal No later than July 31 and Januarv 31 of each year. the sunervisor must certify to the department the list maintenance activities conducted during the first 6 months and the second 6 months of the year respectively. includine- the number of address confirmation requests sent the number of voters designated as inactive. and the number of voters removed from the statewide voter registration system.

(b) If based on the certification provided pursuant to paragraph (a) the
department determines that a supervisor has not conducted the list mainte-
nance activities required by this section. the department shall conduct the appropriate list maintenance activities for that county. Failure to conduct
list maintenance activities as required in this section constitutes a violation ofs. 104.051. AveteF's aame may aet lie Fem9'•ea fFem the FegistFatiea lleek.s lateF thaa 90 aayB pFiBF te the !late ef a feaeFal eleGtiea He"'B\'eF, ae~ag ia this seGtiea sliall pFeGlaae tlie Fem1wal ef tlie aame ef a "9teF fFem tlie "BteF FegistFatiea 1199k.s, at ~time aaa witlieat pFieF aetifiGatiea, apea the wBttea Feqaest ef the "BteF, ily Feasea ef Gea>tiGtiBB ef the "eteF ef a fel9B3',
lly FeaSBB efadjaliiGatieB efthe "BteF as meatally iBGQ}laGitatea "'ith F8SJleGt

23 CODING: Words siAeloeB are deletions; words underlined sre additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

te neting, lly FeasBB ef the deatli ef the "eteF, eF apea a deteFJBiaatiea ef iaeligiilility as JlF9'tided ia s, 98 015(3)
(4) If tlie sapeFViseF FeGei"eS Gliange ef addFess iafeFmatiea fFem the 1 Iaited States I!estal Sel"<iGe eF its liGeasees eF fFem jaFy aetiGes sigaed lly the "eteF aad Fetamed te the Gem'ts, vv~iGli ialiiGates that;
(a) Tlie neteF lias menea n<ithi.B the SQ}lel"<isef"s GBaaty, the Sa}leFI<is9F mast Gliaage the FegistFatiea FeGeFds te slie'll· the B9'" addFess aad mast sead the neteF a aetiGe ef the Gliange lly feA•aFdaille mail, iBGlaliiag a Jl9Stage JlFe}laid JlFSaddFeSSed FetaFB feFJB u<itll, •nhi.Gli tlie "eteF may "eFify eF GBFFeGt the addFess iafeFJBatiea
(II) Tlie ueteF BaS meuea eatside the SQ}lel"<isef"s Geanty, 9F Geataias B9 fel""aFdiBg addFess, the sapemseF sliall sead 1m alidFSss GeBHFJBatiea fiaal aetiGe and Fem9'•e the aame ef the "eteF fmm the FegistFatiea FeGeFd if that neteF did aet·
1. Retam the pestage pFepaia pFeaddFessed Fetam feFJB;
:1. •* JlJleaF te "ete;
3 Cl!.ange tl!.e "9teF's FegistFatiea; BF
4 Reqaest aa ailseatee llallet

daFiag the peFied llegil'llliDg ea the date v<l!.ea the addFess GBBHFJBatiea final aetiGe "'as seat aad ealling ea tlie day afteF tl!.e date ef tl!.e seGead geaeFal eleGtiBB theFeafteF.
(5) Tlie sapel"<iseF mast desigaate as iaaGtine all neteFS wlie lia"e lleea seat 1m aadFSss GBBHFHiatiea fiaal aetiGe aaa "<l!.e liaue aet Fetamed the pestage JlFe}laid JlFSaddFeSSBd FetaFB f9FHI ntithiB 30 days A neteF eB the iaaGtine list mast lie ail9'"ed te "ete aad te Gliange tl!.e "BteF's aame BF addFess eflegal FesidBBGB at tl!.e palls jlaFsaaat te s 101 045 Names ea the iaaGti>.te list may aet lie ased te GalGalate the aamileF ef sigaatw:es aeeded ea aay petitiea BF the qa~mtity ef "etiag eqaipmeat aeeded,
Section 20. Section 98.075, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
(Substantial rewording of section. See s. 98.075, F.S., for present text.)
98.075 Registration records maintenance activities: ineligibility determinations.-
(1) MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS.-The department shall protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensurine- the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records. List maintenance activities must be uniform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, and the Help America Vote Act of2002. The department may adopt by rule uniform standards and procedures to interoret and administer this section.

24 CODING: Words siAeloeB are deletions; words underlined sre additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 26 PageID 180

Ch. 2()()6..278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2()()5.278

(2) DUPLICATE REGISTRATION.-The department shall identify those voters who are registered more than once or those applicants whose recistration applications would result in duplicate registrations. The most recent application shall be deemed an update to the voter registration record.
(3) DECEASED PERSONS.-The department shall identify those registered voters who are deceased by comparing information on the lists of deceased persons received from the Department of Health as provided in s. 98.093. Uoon receipt of such information through the statewide voter registration svstem the supervisor shall remove the name ofthe registered voter.
(4) ADJUDICATION OF MENTAL INCAPACITY.-The department shall identify those registered voters who have been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting and who have not had their voting rights restored by comparing information received from the clerk of the circuit court as provided in s. 98.093. The department shall review such information and make an initial determination as to whether the information is credible and reliable. Ifthe department determines that the information is credible and reliable the department shall notify the supervisor and provide a copy of the supporting documentation indicating the potential ineligibility of the voter to be registered. Upon receipt of the notice that the department has made a determination of initial credibility and reliability. the supervisor shall adhere to the procedures set forth in subsection (7) prior to the removal of a registered voter from the statewide voter registration system.
(5) FELONY CONVICTION.-The department shall identify those registered voters who have been convicted ofa felony and whose rights have not been restored by comparing information received from. but not limited to. a clerk of the circuit court. the Board of Executive Clemency the Department of Corrections the Department of Law Enforcement or a United States Attornev's Office as provided in s. 98.093. The department shall review such information and make an initial determination as to whether the information is credible and reliable. If the department determines that the information is credible and reliable. the department shall notify the supervisor and provide a copy of the supoorting documentation indicating the ootential ineligibilitv of the voter to be registered. Upon receipt of the notice that the department has made a determination of initial credibility and reliability. the supervisor shall adhere to the procedures set forth in subsection (7) prior to the removal of a registered voter's name from the statewide voter registration system.
(6) OTHER BASES FOR INELIGIBILITY.-Ifthe department or supervisor receives information other than from the sources identified in subsections (2)-(5) that a registered voter does not meet the age requirement pursuant to s. 97.041. is not a United States citizen is a fictitious person. or has listed a residence that is not his or her legal residence the supervisor shall adhere to the Procedures set forth in subsection (7) prior to the removal of a registered voter's name from the statewide voter registration system.
(7) PROCEDURES FOR REMOVAL.-

25 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2()()5.278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(a) If the supervisor receives notice or information pursuant to subsections (4)-(6). the supervisor of the county in which the voter is registered shall:
1. Notify the registered voter of his or her potential ineligibility by mail within 7 days after receipt of notice or information. The notice shall include:
a. A statement ofthe basis for the registered voter's ootential ineligibilitv and a copy of any documentation uoon which the ootential ineligibility is based.
b. A statement that failure to resoond within 30 days after receipt of the notice may result in a determination of ineligibility and in removal of the registered voter's name from the statewide voter registration system.
c. A return form that requires the registered voter to admit or deny the accuracy of the information underlving the potential ineligibilitv for purposes of a final determination by the supervisor.
d. A statement that if the voter is denying the accuracy of the information underlying the ootential ineligibility. the voter has a right to request a hearing for the pumose of determining eligibility.
e. Instructions for the registered voter to contact the supervisor of elections of the county in which the voter is registered if assistance is needed in resolving the matter.
f. Instructions for seeking restoration of civil rights following a felony conviction if applicable.
2. If the mailed notice is returned as undeliverable. the supervisor shall publish notice once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the voter was last registered. The notice shall contain the following:
a. The voter's name and address.
b. A statement that the voter is potentially ineligible to be registered to vote.
c. A statement that failure to respond within 30 days after the notice is published may result in a determination of ineligibility by the supervisor and removal of the registered voter's name from the statewide voter registration system.
d. An instruction for the voter to contact the supervisor no later than 30 days after the date of the published notice to receive information regarding the basis for the potential ineligibility and the procedure to resolve the matter.
e. An instruction to the voter that. if further assistance is needed. the voter should contact the supervisor of elections of the county in which the voter is registered.
3. If a registered voter fails to respond to a notice pursuant to subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2. the supervisor shall make a final determina-

26 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 26 PageID 181

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

tion of the voter's eligibility. If the supervisor determines that the voter is ineligible. the supervisor shall remove the name of the registered voter from the statewide voter registration system. The supervisor shall notify the registered voter of the supervisor's determination and action.
4. If a registered voter resoonds to the notice pursuant to subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2. and admits the accuracy of the information underlYing the potential ineligibility. the supervisor shall make a final determination of ineligibility and shall remove the voter's name from the statewide voter registration system. The supervisor shall notify the registered voter of the supervisor's determination and action.
5. Ifa registered voter responds to the notice issued pursuant to subparagraph 1. or subparllgfllph 2. and denies the accuracy of the information underlying the potential ineligibility but does not reauest a hearing. the supervisor shall review the evidence and make a fin!ll determination of eligibility. If such registered voter reauests a hearing. the supervisor shall
send notice to the registered voter to attend a hearing at a time and place
specified in the notice. Upon hearing all evidence presented at the hearing. the supervisor shall make a determination of eligibility. If the supervisor determines that the registered voter is ineligible. the supervisor shall remove the voter's name from the statewide voter registration system and notify the registered voter of the sunervisor's determination and action.
(b) The following shall apply to this subsection:
1. All determinations of eligibility shall be based on a preponderance of the evidence.
2. All proceedings are exempt from the provisions of chapter 120.
3. Any notice shall be sent to the registered voter by certified mail. return receipt requested or other means that provides a verification of receipt or shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation where the voter was last registered. whichever is applicable.
4. The supervisor shall remove the name of any registered voter from the statewide voter registration system only after the supervisor makes a final determination that the voter is ineligible to vote.
5. Any voter whose name has been removed from the statewide voter registration svstem pursuant to a determination ofineligibility mey appeal that determination under the provisions of s. 98.0755.
6. Any voter whose name was removed from the statewide voter registration system on the basis of a determination of ineligibilitv who subseauently becomes eligible to vote must reregister in order to have his or her name restored to the statewide voter registration system.
(8) CERTIFICATION.-
(a) No later than July 31 and January 31 of each year the supervisor shall certify to the department the activities conducted pursuant to this

27 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

section during the first 6 months and the second 6 months of the year. respectively. The certification shall include the number of persons to whom notices were sent pursuant to subsection (7). the number of persons who resoonded to the notices. the number of notices returned as undeliverable. the number of notices published in the newspaper the number of hearings conducted. and the number of persons removed from the statewide voter registration systems and the reasons for such removals.
(b) If. based on the certification provided pursuant to paragraph (a). the department determines that a supervisor has not satisfied the requirements of this section. the department shall satisfv the appropriate requirements for that county. Failure to satisfy the reauirements of this section shall constitute a violation of s. 104.051.
Section 21. Section 98.0755, Florida Statutes, is created to read:
98.0755 Appeal of determination of ineligibilitv.-Appeal of the supervisor's determination of ineligibility pursuant to s. 98.075(7) may be taken to the circuit court in and for the county where the person was registered. Notice of appeal must be filed within the time and in the manner provided by the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and acts as supersedeas. Trial in the circuit court is de novo and governed by the rules of that court. Unless the person can show that his or her name was erroneously or illegally removed from the statewide voter registration system. or that he or she is indigent. the person must bear the costs of the trial in the circuit court. Otherwise the cost of the appeal must be paid by the supervisor ofelections.
Section 22. Section 98.077, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.077 Update of voter signature.-
(1) A registered voter may uodate his or her signature on file in the statewide voter registration system at any time using a voter registration application submitted to a voter registration official.
rn The department and Supervisors Slljlel'l<iSer ofelections shall include
in any correspondence other than postcard notifications and notices relating to eligibility sent to a pre>o'iEle te e~Kh registered voter information regarding efthe eeaaty the eppertnnity te lljlaate his er her sigaatare ea fi.le at the BYJlel'l<iSer!s efl'iee By pre><i.aiag R9tifi.Gati9R ef the aBility te ae 89 iR any eerrespeaEleaee, ether than pestearEl aetifi.eatieas, seat te the "eter The aetiee shall aEI><i.se when, where, and how to update the voter's signature and shall provide the voter information on how to obtain a voter registration application f9rm from a voter registration official which the BYJlel'l<iser that can be returned to update the signature.
.(ID Ia aEIElitiea, At least once during each general election year, the supervisor shall publish in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation or other newspaper in the county deemed appropriate by the supervisor a notice specifying when, where, or how a voter can update his or her signature that is on file and er how a voter can obtain a voter registration application f9rm from ll voter registration official the sapel'l<iser to do so.

28 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 26 PageID 182

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2(1()5..278

(4) All signature updates for use in verifving absentee and provisional ballots must be received by the appropriate supervisor of elections no later than the start ofthe canvassing ofabsentee ballots by the canvassing board. The signature on file at the start of the canvass of the absentees is the signature that shall be used in verifving the signature on the absentee and provisional ballot certificates.
Section 23. Section 98.081, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.081 Names removed from the statewide voter registration system ~; restrictions on reregistering; recordkeeping; restoration of erroneously or illegally removed names.-
(1) Any person who requested that his or her name be removed from the statewide voter registration system 999k& between the book-closing date of the fiRii primary and the date of the BeGeBG primary may not register in a different political party until after the date of the lli!GIIRil primary election.
(2) When the name of any elector is removed from the statewide voter registration system be9ks pursuant to s. 98.065 2r:r s. 98.075, er s Qli OQ3, the elector's original registration application farm shall be retained by the supervisor of elections having custody ofthe application filed alflhabetisall3• in the eft'iee ef the sQJ~eFI<iser. As alternatives, registrations removed from the statewide voter registration svstem be9ks may be microfilmed and such microfilms substituted for the original registration applications f&rms; or, when voter registration information, including the voter's signature, is maintained digitally or on electronic, magnetic, or optic media, such stored information may be substituted for the original registration application farm. Such microfilms or stored information shall be retained by the supervisor of elections having ia--tAe custody ef the BIIJieFI'iser. In the event the original registration applications f&rms are microfilmed or maintained digitally or on electronic or other media, such originals may be destroyed in accordance with the schedule approved by the Bureau of Archives and Records Management ofthe Division of Library and Information Services of the department.
(3) When the name of any elector has been erroneously or illegally removed from the statewide voter registration system ~. the name of the elector shall be restored by a voter registration official the BQJieFI<iser upon satisfactory proof, even though the registration period for that election is closed.
Section 24. Section 98.093, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.093 Duty of officials to furnish lists ofdeceased persons, persons adjudicated mentally incapacitated, and persons convicted of a felony.-
(1) In order to ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records. it is necessary for the department to receive certain information from state and federal officials and entities. The department and supervisors of elections shall use the information provided from the sources in subsection (2) to maintain the voter registration records.

29 CODING: Words siAel<eB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2(1()5..278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2(1()5..278

(2) To the maximum extent feasible state and local government agencies shall facilitate provision of information and access to data to the department including, but not limited to databases that contain reliable criminal records and records of deceased persons. State and local government agencies that provide such data shall do so without charge if the direct cost incurred by those agencies is not significant.
U!2 The Department of Health shall furnish monthly to the department
eaGI!. SQJ~emsi!F 9f eleetiiiRs a list containing the name, address, date of birth, date of death social security number race, and sex of each deceased person 17 years of age or older whe "'as a resideat ef s11eh SQJ~ei'Vise~s ll911Biy.
~ Each clerk ofthe circuit court shall furnish monthly to the department, at least ease eaeh meat~!., delP·er te eaGI!. BQJieFI<iser ef eleetieas a list of those persons who have been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting during the preceding calendar month a list of those persons whose mental capacitv with respect to voting has been restored during the preceding calendar month and a list ofthose persons who have returned signed jury notices during the preceding months to the clerk of the circuit court indicating a change of address. Each list shall include staiiDg the
name, address, date of birth, race, aaa sex. and whichever is available. the
Florida driver's license number Florida identification card number or social security number of each such person sea•.<isted ef a feleay dllriag the preeed iag ealeadar meath whe mas a resideat ef that SQJieFI<ise~s eelmiy, a list statiag the aame, address, date efsiFth, rase, and seK efeaeh persea adj11di Gated Rli!Btally iaeapaeitated "qth respeet te "etiag dllriag the flF9Gediag ealeadar meath whe "'as a resideat ef that SIIJIE!FI<ise~s ee~, and a list statiag the aame, address, date efsirtl!., rase, and BEl* efeaGI!. pi!Fsea ~I!Be meatal eapaei~ "<ita respeet te "etiag has seea restered whe mas a resideat 9f that SllfleFI<ise~s G911Bty.
~ Upon receipt of information from the United States Attorney, listing persons convicted of a felony in federal court, the department shall .l!llll. such information to identify registered voters or applicants for voter registration who may be potentially ineligible based on information provided in accordance with s. 98.075 immediately ferward s11GI!. infermatiea te the SllfleFI<iser ef eleetieas fer the eermty wllere the effeader resides.
(d) The Department of Law Enforcement shall identify those oersons who have been convicted of a felony who appear in the voter registration records supplied by the statewide voter registration svstem in a time and manner that enables the department to meet its obligations under state and federal law.
(e) The Board of Executive Clemency shall furnish monthly to the department a list ofthose persons granted clemency in the preceding month or any updates to prior records which have occurred in the preceding month. The list shall contain the Board of Executive Clemency case number. name. address. date of birth. race. sex social security number. if available and references to record identifiers assigned by the Department of Corrections a unique identifier of each clemency case. and the effective date ofclemency of each person.

30 CODING: Words siRel<ea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 26 PageID 183

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(0 The Department of Corrections shall furnish monthly to the department a list ofthose persons transferred to the Deoartment of Corrections in the preceding month or any updates to prior records which have occurred in the preceding month. The list shall contain the name. address. date of birth. race sex social security number Deoartment of Corrections record identification number. and associated Department of Law Enforcement felony conviction record number of each oerson.
(g) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall furnish monthly to the department a list of those persons whose names have been removed from the driver's license database because they have been licensed in another state. The list shall contain the name address. date ofbirth. sex. social security number. and driver's license number of each such person.
(4) {JpeB R!Geipt ef any SliGh list, the Slipe:r><iSeF shall Fem&'Je fFBm the :Fe!fistFatiea beeks the aame ef ~ peFsea listed ""<he is deseased, sea·<isted ef a feleay, eF adj11disated meatally iasapasitated with :Fespest te ueting, .".· peFSea ~<he has had his eF heF meatal sapasity w4th :Fespest te uetiag Fe steFBd 9F "'he has had his eF heF Fight te vete :FesteFBd afteF GBIP<iGtiBB ef a feleay shall be F91Jlii.:Fed te Fe:Fe!fisteF te ha\•9 his BF hBF aame Feste:Fed te the :Fe!fistFatiea beeks,
{ill(a) Nothing in this section shall limit or restrict the supervisor in his or her duty to remove the names of BYGh persons from the statewide voter registration system pursuant to s. 98.075(7) based upon beeks afteF "eRfisa tiBB-4 information received from other sources.
Section 25. Effective August 1, 2006, section 98.0981, Florida Statutes, is created to read:
98.0981 Statewide voter registration database. Within 75 davs after a general election or within 15 days after all supervisors of elections have undated voter history information. whichever occurs later the department shall send to the President of the Senate. the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Senate Minority Leader and the House Minority Leader a reoort in electronic format of all voters qualified to vote in the election or primary. The report shall include for each voter the code used by the department to uniquely identify the voter- all information provided in the uniform statewide voter registration application pursuant to s. 97.052(2). except what is specifically identified as confidential or exempt from public-records requirements: the date of registration· the representative district. senatorial district. congressional district and precinct in which the voter resides· and whether the voter voted at the precinct location, voted by early vote. voted by absentee ballot attempted to vote by absentee ballot that was not counted. attempted to vote by provisional ballot that was not counted, or did not vote.
Section 26. Section 98.212, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.212 Department and supervisors to furnish statistical and other information.-

31 CODING: Words Meke& are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(1)(a) Upon written request, the department and any suoervisor of the respective counties SIIJie:r>•isQFS shall, as promptly as possible, furnish to recognized public or private universities and senior colleges within the state, to state or county governmental agencies, and to recognized political party committees statistical information for the purpose of analyzing election returns and results.
(b) The department and any suoervisor SIIJiel'l•iseFs may require reimbursement for any part or all of the actual expenses of supplying any information requested under paragraph (a). For the purposes of this subsection, the department and supervisors may use the services of any research and statistical personnel that may be supplied.
(c) Lists of names submitted to the department and any supervisor ofthe respective counties SIIJie:r><isBFS for indication of registration or nonregistration or of party affiliation shall be processed at any time at cost, except that in no case shall the charge exceed 10 cents for each name on which the information is furnished.
(2) The supervisors shall provide information as requested by the department for program evaluation and reporting to the ~ Election Assist~ Commission pursuant to federal law the :Natieaal "stBF Re!fistFatiea ~t eflQQ3.
Section 27. Section 98.461, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.461 Registration application feFm, precinct register; contents.-
ill A registration application feFm, approved by the Department ofState,
containing the information required ins. 97.052 shall be retained by the supervisor of elections of the county of the applicant's registration filed alphabetisally ia the eft'ise ef the SIIJie:r><is9F as the masteF list 9f elesteFS ef the sennty. However, the registration application feFms may be microfilmed and such microfilm miGFefilms substituted for the original registration ru1: plication feFms; or, when voter registration information, including the voter's signature, is maintained digitally or on electronic, magnetic, or optic media, such stored information may be substituted for the original registration application feFm. Such microfilms or stored information shall be retained in the custody of the supervisor of elections of the county of the applicant's registration. In the event the original registration applications feFms are microfilmed or maintained digitally or on electronic or other media, such originals may be destroyed in accordance with the schedule approved by the Bureau of Archives and Records Management of the Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of State. A&.aa altematiue, the iafeF!BatiBB fFBm the :FejfistFatiea feFIB, iasladiag the sigaa t\IFe, may be elestFeffisally R!JIFBdliGed and steFed as JIF9'<ided ia s, Q8 451
ill A computer printout or electronic database shall be used at the polls as a precinct register iB lieY ef the :FejfistFati9B beeks. The precinct register shall contain the date ofthe election, the precinct number, and the following information concerning each registered elector: last name, first name, aad middle name or initiaL and suffix; party affiliation; residence address; registration number; date of birth; sex, if provided; race, if provided; whether the

32 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 26 PageID 184

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

voter needs assistance in voting; and such other additional information as to readily identify the elector. The precinct register shall also contain a space for the elector's signature and a space for the initials of the witnessing clerk or inspector or an electronic device may be provided for this purpose.
Section 28. Effective January 1, 2007, section 100.371, Florida Statutes, as amended by section 9 of chapter 2002-281, Laws of Florida, is amended to read:
100.371 Initiatives; procedure for placement on ballot.-
(1) Constitutional amendments proposed by initiative shall be placed on the ballot for the general election provided the initiative has been filed with eaaW'l'iag in eGess ef 90 days fFem the aei:tifiaatiea eflaallet pesiti.ea lay the Secretary of State no later than February 1 of the year the general election is held. A petition shall be deemed to be filed with the Secretarv of State uoon the date the secretary determines that the netition has been signed by the constitutionally required number of electors.
(2) Suah aei:tifiaatinn shall lae issued mhea the SeaFetaJ"Y ef State has Fl!aeiued "eFifisatiea seFtifisates fFem the SIIJie:Rr4s9FS ef eleGtieas iadisating that the Fl!quisite nnmlaeF aad distFilautiea ef valid sigaaWr-as ef elesteFs have laeea sulamitted te aad "E!Fified lay the supe:Rr4seFs Enezy sigaatuFI! shall lae dated whea made and shall lae ualid faF a peFied ef 4 yeaFs fallewiag sush date, pl'9¥ided all etheF FI!IJWFemeats ef la-w aFe semplied with
m:» The sponsor of an initiative amendment shall, prior to obtaining
any signatures, register as a political committee pursuant to s. 106.03 and submit the text of the proposed amendment to the Secretary of State, with the form on which the signatures will be affixed, and shall obtain the approval of the Secretary of State of such form. The Secretary of State shall adopt rules pursuant to s. 120.54 prescribing the style and requirements of such form. Upon filing with the Secretary of State, the text of the proposed amendment and all forms filed in connection with this section must, upon request, be made available in alternative formats.
{ID(4+ Each signature shall be dated when made and shall be valid for a period of 4 years following such date. provided all other reouirements oflaw are met. The sponsor shall submit signed and dated forms to the appropriate supervisor ofelections for verification as to the number ofregistered electors whose valid signatures appear thereon. The supervisor shall promptly verify the signatures upon payment ofthe fee required by s. 99.097. The supervisor shall promptly record each valid simature in the statewide voter registration system in the manner prescribed by the Secretary of State. 1 !pea sam Jlletiea ef •teFifisatiea, the siiJie:Rr4seF shall e*esute a sei:tifieate iRdisatmg the tetal nnmlaeF ef sigaatuFes eheGked, the aumlaeF ef sigaatUF9s •teFified as "alia a-Ra as laeiag efFegisteFea elesteFs, a-Ra the distFilautiea lay sBRgFes sieaal distFiet This sei:tifisate shall lae immediately tFa-Rsmitted te theSes Fl!tazy af State The supervisor shall retain the signature forms for at least 1 year following the election in which the issue appeared on the ballot or until the Division of Elections notifies the supervisors of elections that the committee which circulated the petition is no longer seeking to obtain ballot position.

33 CODING: Words etFieke& are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

~ The Secretary of State shall determine from the signatures verified by the •<aFifieatiaR seFtifisates FI!GE!N•ed fFem supervisors of elections and recorded in the statewide voter registration svstem the total number of verified valid signatures and the distribution of such signatures by congressional districts. Upon a determination that the requisite number and distribution of valid signatures have been obtained, the secretary shall issue a certificate of ballot position for that proposed amendment and shall assign a designating number pursuant to s. 101.161. 4 JletitiBR shall lae deemed te lae filed with the SesFI!taey ef State "8Jl9R the date ef the Fl!eeiJlt lay the sesFetaFY ef a seFtifisate 9F eei:tifisates fl.em SliJle:Rr4seFB ef eleetieRB iadieat iag the Jletitiea has laeea sigaed lay the eeRStitlitieaally FequiFed nnmlaeF ef eleGt9FS.
{Q}(6)(a) Within 45 days after receipt of a proposed revision or amendment to the State Constitution by initiative petition from the Secretary of State BF, withia 30 days afteF such Feseillt if Fl!eeiJlt BGGUFB 120 days eF less laefaFe the elestiea at which the questi.ea ehati~ the ameadmeat will lae JlFI!Seated, the Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall complete an analysis and financial impact statement to be placed on the ballot of the estimated increase or decrease in any revenues or costs to state or local governments resulting from the proposed initiative. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall submit the fmancial impact statement to the Attorney General and Secretary of State.
(b)l. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall provide an opportunity for any proponents or opponents of the initiative to submit information and may solicit information or analysis from any other entities or agencies, including the Office of Economic and Demographic Research. All meetings ofthe Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall be open to the public as provided in chapter 286.
2. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference is established to review, analyze, and estimate the financial impact of amendments to or revisions of the State Constitution proposed by initiative. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall consist of four principals: one person from the Executive Office of the Govemor; the coordinator of the Office of Economic and Demographic Research, or his or her designee; one person from the professional staff of the Senate; and one person from the professional staff ofthe House of Representatives. Each principal shall have appropriate fiscal expertise in the subject matter ofthe initiative. A Financial Impact Estimating Conference may be appointed for each initiative.
3. Principals of the Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall reach a consensus or majority concurrence on a clear and unambiguous financial impact statement, no more than 75 words in length, and immediately submit the statement to the Attomey General. Nothing in this subsection prohibits the Financial Impact Estimating Conference from setting forth a range of potential impacts in the financial impact statement. Any fmancial impact statement that a court finds not to be in accordance with this section shall be remanded solely to the Financial Impact Estimating Conference for redrafting. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall redraft the financial impact statement within 15 days.

34 CODING: Words etFiekef> are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 26 PageID 185

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 20()6.278

4. If the members of the Financial Impact Estimating Conference are unable to agree on the statement required by this subsection, or if the Supreme Court has rejected the initial submission by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference and no redraft has been approved by the Supreme Court by 5 p.m. on the 75th day before the election, the following statement shall appear on the ballot pursuant to s. 101.161(1): "The financial impact of this measure, if any, cannot be reasonably determined at this time."
(c) The financial impact statement must be separately contained and be set forth after the ballot summary as required ins. 101.161(1).
(d)l. Any financial impact statement that the Supreme Court finds not to be in accordance with this subsection shall be remanded solely to the Financial Impact Estimating Conference for redrafting, provided the court's advisory opinion is rendered at least 75 days before the election at which the question of ratifying the amendment will be presented. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall prepare and adopt a revised financial impact statement no later than 5 p.m. on the 15th day after the date of the court's opinion.
2. If, by 5 p.m. on the 75th day before the election, the Supreme Court has not issued an advisory opinion on the initial financial impact statement prepared by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference for an initiative amendment that otherwise meets the legal requirements for ballot placement, the financial impact statement shall be deemed approved for placement on the ballot.
3. In addition to the financial impact statement required by this subsection, the Financial Impact Estimating Conference shall draft an initiative fmancial information statement. The initiative financial information statement should describe in greater detail than the financial impact statement any projected increase or decrease in revenues or costs that the state or local governments would likely experience if the ballot measure were approved. If appropriate, the initiative financial information statement may include both estimated dollar amounts and a description placing the estimated dollar amounts into context. The initiative financial information statement must include both a summary of not more than 500 words and additional detailed information that includes the assumptions that were made to develop the financial impacts, workpapers, and any other information deemed relevant by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference.
4. The Department of State shall have printed, and shall furnish to each supervisor of elections, a copy of the summary from the initiative financial information statements. The supervisors shall have the summary from the initiative financial information statements available at each polling place and at the main office of the supervisor of elections upon request.
5. The Secretary of State and the Office of Economic and Demographic Research shall make available on the Internet each initiative financial information statement in its entirety. In addition, each supervisor of elections whose office has a website shall post the summary from each initiative fmancial information statement on the website. Each supervisor shall include the Internet addresses for the information statements on the Secre-

35 CODING: Words ~are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2005-278

tary of State's and the Office of Economic and Demographic Research's websites in the publication or mailing required by s. 101.20.
iliW7) The Department of State may adopt rules in accordance with s.
120.54 to carry out the provisions of subsections ill:(Q2 fl+-00.
Section 29. Subsection (3) of section 101.001, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.001 Precincts and polling places; boundaries.-
(3XJU Each supervisor of elections shall maintain a suitable map drawn to a scale no smaller than 3 miles to the inch and clearly delineating all major observable features such as roads, streams, and railway lines and showing the current geographical boundaries of each precinct, representative district, and senatorial district, and other type of district in the county subject to the elections process in this code.
ilil The supervisor of elections shall notify the Secretary of State in writ-
ing within 30 days after flf any reorganization of precincts and shall furnish a copy ofthe map showing the current geographical boundaries and designation of each new precinct. However. if Precincts are composed of whole census blocks the supervisor may furnish. in lieu of a copy of the map a list. in an electronic format prescribed by the Department of State associating each census block in the county with its precinct.
(c) Any precinct established or altered under the provisions of this section shall consist of areas bounded on all sides only by:
1. Census block boundaries from the most recent United States Census:
2. Guvernmental unit boundaries reported in the most recent Boundarv and Annexation Survey published by the United States Census Bureau:
3. Visible features that are readily distinguishable uoon the ground. such as streets. railroads. tracks. streams and lakes. and that are indicated uoon
current census maps official Department of Transportation maps. official
municipal maps. official county maps or a combination of such maps:
4. Boundaries of public parks. public school grounds or churches: or
5. Boundaries of counties. incorporated municipalities or other political subdivisions that meet criteria established by the United States Census Bureau for block boundaries.
(d) Until July 1 2012 a supervisor may apply for and obtain from the Secretarv of State a waiver of the reouirement in paragraph (c).
Section 30. Subsections (1) and (3) of section 101.043, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
101.043 Identification required at polls.-
(I) The precinct register, as prescribed ins. 98.461, shall be used at the polls is lieu ef the FegistFatiea beeks for the purpose of identifying the

36 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 26 PageID 186

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

elector at the polls prior to allowing him or her to vote. The clerk or inspector shall require each elector, upon entering the polling place, to present one of the following a current and valid picture identifications:
(a) florida driver's license. (b) Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. (c) United States passport. (d) Employee badge or identification. (e) Buver's club identification. <0 Debit or credit card. (g) Militarv identification. (h) Student identification. (i) Retirement center identification. (j) Neighborhood association identification. (k) Public assistance identification as Jll'9¥ided iB s 97 0535(3Xa).

If the picture identification does not contain the signature of the voter, an additional identification that provides the voter's signature shall be required. The elector shall sign his or her name in the space provided on the precinct register or on an electronic deyice provided for recording the voter's
signature....-& The clerk or inspector shall compare the signature with that
on the identification provided by the elector and enter his or her initials in the space provided on the precinct register or on an electronic device provided for that purpose and allow the elector to vote if the clerk or inspector is satisfied as to the identity of the elector.
(3) If the elector who fails to furnish the required identification is ;m elector subject to s 97.0535 a first time ueter whe registered 9y mail and has not provided the required identification to a voter registration official the supel"<iser ef eleetieas prior to election day, the elector shall be allowed to vote a provisional ballot. The canvassing board shall determine the validity of the ballot pursuant to s. 101.048(2).
Section 31. Subsections (2) and (3) of section 101.045, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
101.045 Electors must be registered in precinct; provisions for residence or name change.-
(2Xa) An elector who moves from the precinct "<ithia the eeuaty in which the elector is registered may be permitted to vote in the precinct to which he or she has moved his or her legal residence, provided such elector completes an affirmation in substantially the following form:

37 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 21J05.278

LAWS OF FLORIDA
Change of Legal Residence of Registered Voter

Ch. 2005-278

Under penalties for false swearing, I, ...(Name of voter)..., swear (or affirm) that the former address of my legal residence was ...(Address of legal residence)... in the municipality of ...., in .... County, Florida, and I was registered to vote in the .... precinct of .... County, Florida; that I have not voted in the precinct of my former registration in this election; that I now reside at ...(Address of legal residence)... in the Municipality of ...., in .... County, Florida, and am therefore eligible to vote in the .... precinct of .... County, Florida; and I further swear (or affirm) that I am otherwise legally registered and entitled to vote.
...(Signature of voter whose address of legal residence has changed)...
(b) An elector whose name changes because of marriage or other legal process may be permitted to vote, provided such elector completes an affirmation in substantially the following form:
Change of Name of Registered Voter

Under penalties for false swearing, I, ...(New name of voter)..., swear (or affirm) that my name has been changed because of marriage or other legal

process. My former name and address of legal residence appear on the registration records ~ of precinct .... as follows:

Name .....

Address . . . . . . . . . . . . .

... .. .

Municipality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .

County .......................... . Florida, Zip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

My present name and address of legal residence are as follows:

Name .....

Address . . .

. .

.. ..

. ..

Municipality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .

County ................ · . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Florida, Zip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and I further swear (or affirm) that I am otherwise legally registered and

entitled to vote.

...(Signature of voter whose name has changed)...

(c) Such affrrmation, when completed and presented at the precinct in
which such elector is entitled to vote, and upon verification of the elector's registration, shall entitle such elector to vote as provided in this subsection. If the elector's eligibility to vote cannot be determined, he or she shall be entitled to vote a provisional ballot, subject to the requirements and proce-
dures in s. 101.048. Upon receipt of an affirmation certifying a change in address of legal residence or name, the supervisor shall as soon as practicable make the necessary changes in the statewide voter registration system
reeerds ef the eeuaty to indicate the change in address of legal residence or
name of such elector.

38 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 26 PageID 187

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

(d) Instead of the affirmation contained in paragraph (a) or paragraph (b), an elector may complete a voter registration application that indicates the change of name or change of address of legal residence.
{e} A FelfHest feF BB allseBtee ballet fliH'BHani te s. Hll.62 ·:<hish iadieates that the elesteF has ha& a shBBge ef aliliFess ef legal Fesideaee fl:em that ia the SIIJII!F'IIiseF's Feeems shall he sllftieieat as the aetiGe te the Sllfli!F'I<iseF ef shBBge ef addFess ef legal Fesideaee FelflliFed by this seetiea, Upea Feeeipt efsssh FelfHest f9F BB ahseatee ballet fl:em an. eleeteF Vl<he has shaaged his eF heF addFess ef legal Fesideaee, the Sllfle~<iseF shall fli'B"ide the eleeteF vfith the pFepeF ballet f9F the flFeeinet iB whish the eleeteF thea has his eF her legal resideaee
{3) Whea aa eleeteF's aame !lees aet appear ea the Fegistratiea heelii! ef the eleetiea preeiast in Vlr.bieh the elester is Fegistered, the eleeter may ha>•e his er heF aame resteFed if the Sllfle~·iser is ethe~·:ise satisfied that the elester is ualidly registeFed, that the eleeteF's aame has heea eFFeaeessly emitted fl:em the seeks, aad that the eleeteF is eatidea te have his eF heF aame FesteFed, The Sllfle~·iseF, if he 91' she is satisfied as te the eleetel"s pFBViess FBgistratiea, shall all9VI• sash fleFBe& te uete BBG shall theFeafteF issse a Gllfllisate Fegistratiea iaeatifieatiea sam
Section 32. Subsection (1) of section 101.048, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.048 Provisional ballots.-
(1) At all elections, a voter claiming to be properly registered in the state lliMHIA;y and eligible to vote at the precinct in the election, but whose eligibility cannot be determined, and other persons specified in the code shall be entitled to vote a provisional ballot. Once voted, the provisional ballot shall be placed in a secrecy envelope and thereafter sealed in a provisional ballot envelope. The provisional ballot shall be deposited in a ballot box. All provisional ballots shall remain sealed in their envelopes for return to the supervisor ofelections. The department shall prescribe the form ofthe provisional ballot envelope.
Section 33. Effective January 1, 2007, subsection (1) of section 101.161, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.161 Referenda; ballots.-
(!) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot after the list of candidates, followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no," and shall be styled in such a manner that a "yes" vote will indicate approval of the proposal and a "no" vote will indicate rejection. The wording ofthe substance ofthe amendment or other public measure and the ballot title to appear on the ballot shall be embodied in the joint resolution, constitutional revision commission proposal, constitutional convention proposal, taxation and budget reform commission proposal, or enabling resolution or ordinance. Except for amendments and ballot language proposed by

39 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

joint resolution, the substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. In addition, for every amendment proposed by initiative, the ballot shall include, following the ballot summary, a separate fmancial impact statement concerning the measure prepared by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference in accordance with s. 100.371~. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of.
Section 34. Subsection (2) of section 101.56062, Florida Statutes, as created by chapter 2002-281, Laws of Florida, is amended to read:
101.56062 Standards for accessible voting systems.-
(2) Such voting system must include at least one accessible voter inter-
face device installed in each oolling place flF8Gi&et which meets the require-
ments of this section, except for paragraph (l)(d).
Section 35. Subsection (1) of section 101.5608, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.5608 Voting by electronic or electromechanical method; procedures.-
(1) Each elector desiring to vote shall be identified to the clerk or inspector of the election as a duly qualified elector of such election and shall sign his or her name on the iB ink eF iadelihle fle&eil te aa iaeatifieatiea blank, sig&at\H'e slip, precinct register, or other form or device provided by the supervisor ballet StsB e& "<hish the ballet Serial BlHBheF may Be Feseraea. The inspector shall compare the signature with the signature on the identification provided by the elector. If the inspector is reasonably sure that the person is entitled to vote, the inspector shall provide the person with a ballot.
Section 36. Effective August 1, 2006, section 101.573, Florida Statutes, is created to read:
101.573 Record of votes by precinct.-
(!) Within 75 days after the date of a municipal election or runoff, whichever occurs later, a presidential preference primary or a general election, the suoorvisor of elections shall file with the Department of State precinctlevel election results for that election cycle. including any primarv elections. Precinct-level election results shall record for each precinct the returns of ballots cast at the precinct location to which have been added the returns of absentee and early ballots cast by voters registered in the precinct.
(2) The Department of State shall adoot rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 prescribing the form by which supervisors of elections shall submit election results for each precinct.
Section 37. Effective January 1, 2007, paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section 101.62, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

40 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 22 of 26 PageID 188

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

101.62 Request for absentee ballots.-
(4Xa) To each absent qualified elector overseas who has requested an absentee ballot, the supervisor of elections shall, not fewer than 35 days before the first primary election, mail an absentee ballot. Not fewer than 45 days before the second primary and general election, the supervisor of elec· tions shall mail an advance absentee ballot to those persons requesting ballots for such elections. The advance absentee ballot for the second primary shall be the same as the first primary absentee ballot as to the names of candidates, except that for any offices where there are only two candidates, those offices and all political party executive committee offices shall be omitted. Except as provided in ss. 99.063(4) and 100.371~, the advance absentee ballot for the general election shall be as specified in s. 101.151, except that in the case of candidates of political parties where nominations were not made in the first primary, the names ofthe candidates placing first and second in the first primary election shall be printed on the advance absentee ballot. The advance absentee ballot or advance absentee ballot information booklet shall be of a different color for each election and also a different color from the absentee ballots for the first primary, second primary, and general election. The supervisor shall mail an advance absentee ballot for the second primary and general election to each qualified absent elector for whom a request is received until the absentee ballots are printed. The supervisor shall enclose with the advance second primary absentee ballot and advance general election absentee ballot an explanation stating that the absentee ballot for the election will be mailed as soon as it is printed; and, if both the advance absentee ballot and the absentee ballot for the election are returned in time to be counted, only the absentee ballot will be counted. The Department ofState may prescribe by rule the requirements for preparing and mailing absentee ballots to absent qualified electors overseas.
Section 38. Subsection (3) is added to section 101.64, Florida Statutes, to read:
101.64 Delivery of absentee ballots; envelopes; form.-
(3) The suoorvisor shall mark code indicate on. or otherwise track the precinct of the absent elector for each absentee ballot.
Section 39. Paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section 101.657, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.657 Early voting.-
(lXa) The supervisor of elections shall allow an elector to vote early in the main or branch office of the supervisor by depositing the voted ballot in a voting device used by the supervisor to collect or tabulate ballots. The supervisor shall mark code indicate on or otherwise track the voter's precinct for each early voted ballot. In order for a branch office to be used for early voting, it shall be a full-service facility of the supervisor and shall have been designated as such at least 1 year prior to the election. The supervisor may designate any city hall or public library as early voting sites; however, if so designated, the sites must be geographically located so as to provide all

41 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

voters in the county an equal opportunity to cast a ballot, insofar as is practicable. The results or tabulation may not be made before the close of the polls on election day.
Section 40. Section 101.663, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.663 Electors; change of residence to another state.-
(1) 4 a eleGter whe ehaages his er her resiciease te aBether s9\Hl~ iB ~lericia frem the selffit?' ia mericia ia whish he er she is registereci as aa eleGtor after the seeks iB the S9UB~ te "<hieA the eleeter has SAaBgeQ his er her resicieaee are elesea fur 1m¥ geaeral, primacy:, er SJieeial eleGtiea shall se permittea te "ete asseatee iB the sennty ef his eF her furmer resiaeBS9 iB that eleetiea fer l!Fesiaeat ana Vise l!Fesiaeat, tl'nitea States Seaater, statemicie efiises j aaa statewiae issaes Sash persea shall aet se permitteci te "~te ia the eennt3' ef the persea's furmer resiaeaee after the geaeral eleGtieB..
(2} An elector registered in this state who moves his or her permanent residence to another state and who is prohibited by the laws of that state from voting for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States shall be permitted to vote absentee in the county of his or her former residence for those offices.
Section 41. Subsection (1) of section 101.6921, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.6921 Delivery of special absentee ballot to certain first-time voters.-
(1) The provisions of this section apply to voters who are subject to the provisions of s. 97.0535 registereci te ·.•ete sy mail, mae AlP'S Bet JIF9'<ieas~· •;etea ia the eermty, and who have not provided the identification or certification required by s. 97.0535 by the time the absentee ballot is mailed.
Section 42. Section 101.6923, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.6923 Special absentee ballot instructions for certain first-time voters.-
(1) The provisions of this section apply to voters who are subject to the provisions of s. 97.0535 registerea te uete sy mail, "41-e Aa'le aet JIF9'<ieasl;y 'Jeteci iB the eermty, and who have not provided the identification or information required by s. 97.0535 by the time the absentee ballot is mailed.
(2) A voter covered by this section shall be provided with the fuii~V·riag printed instructions with his or her absentee ballot in substantially the following form:
READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE MARKING YOUR BALLOT. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS MAY CAUSE YOUR BALLOT NOT TO COUNT.
1. In order to ensure that your absentee ballot will be counted, it should be completed and returned as soon as possible so that it can reach the

42 CODING: Words ~are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 23 of 26 PageID 189

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2005-278

supervisor ofelections ofthe county in which your precinct is located no later than 7 p.m. on the date of the election.
2. Mark your ballot in secret as instructed on the ballot. You must mark your own ballot unless you are unable to do so because ofblindness, disability, or inability to read or write.
3. Mark only the number of candidates or issue choices for a race as indicated on the ballot. If you are allowed to "Vote for One" candidate and you vote for more than one, your vote in that race will not be counted.
4. Place your marked ballot in the enclosed secrecy envelope and seal the envelope.
5. Insert the secrecy envelope into the enclosed envelope bearing the Voter's Certificate. Seal the envelope and completely fill out the Voter's Certificate on the back of the envelope.
a. You must sign your name on the line above (Voter's Signature).
b. Ifyou are an overseas voter, you must include the date you signed the Voter's Certificate on the line above (Date) or your ballot may not be counted.
6. Unless you meet one of the exemptions in Item 7., you must make a copy of one of the following forms of identification:
a. Identification which must include your name and photograph:~ aBd ualid Flerida driueF's lieease; Fle:rida ideatifieatiea e!H'd issYed lly the DI!Jiai"tmeat efHighmay Safe~ and Ueter 1 lehieles; United States passport; employee badge or identification; buyer's club identification card; debit or credit card; military identification; student identification; retirement center identification; neighborhood association identification; eatertaiameat idea tifieatiea; or public assistance identification; or
b. Identification which shows your name and current residence address: current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or government document (excluding voter identification card).
7. The identification requirements ofltem 6. do not apply ifyou meet one of the following requirements:
a. You are 65 years of age or older.
b. You have a temporary or permanent physical disability.
c. You are a member of a uniformed service on active duty who, by reason of such active duty, will be absent from the county on election day.
d. You are a member of the Merchant Marine who, by reason of service in the Merchant Marine, will be absent from the county on election day.
e. You are the spouse or dependent of a member referred to in paragraph c. or paragraph d. who, by reason of the active duty or service of the member, will be absent from the county on election day.

43 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FWRIDA

Ch. 2005-278

f. You are currently residing outside the United States.
8. Place the envelope bearing the Voter's Certificate into the mailing envelope addressed to the supervisor. Insert a copy of your identification in the mailing envelope. DO NOT PUT YOUR IDENTIFICATION INSIDE THE SECRECY ENVELOPE WITH THE BALLOT OR INSIDE THE ENVELOPE WHICH BEARS THE VOTER'S CERTIFICATE OR YOUR BALLOT WILL NOT COUNT.
9. Mail, deliver, or have delivered the completed mailing envelope. Be sure there is sufficient postage if mailed.
10. FELONY NOTICE. It is a felony under Florida law to accept any gift, payment, or gratuity in exchange for your vote for a candidate. It is also a felony under Florida law to vote in an election using a false identity or false address, or under any other circumstances making your ballot false or fraudulent.
Section 43. Subsection (3) of section 102.012, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
102.012 Inspectors and clerks to conduct elections.-
(3) The supervisor shall furnish inspectors of election for each precinct with the list of registered electors for that precinct registratiea beeks di uided aiJ!habetiea~ as will best faeilitate the heldiag ef aB eleetiea. The supervisor shall also furnish to the inspectors ofelection at the polling place at each precinct in the supervisor's county a sufficient number offorms and blanks for use on election day.
Section 44. Subsections (1), (2), and (3) of section 104.013, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
104.013 Unauthorized use, possession, or destruction of voter information registratiea ideatifieatiea card.-
(1) It is unlawful for any person knowingly to have in his or her possession any blank, forged, stolen, fictitious, counterfeit, or unlawfully issued voter information registratiea ideatifieatiea card unless possession by such person has been duly authorized by the supervisor.
(2) It is unlawful for any person to barter, trade, sell, or give away a voter information registratiea ideatifieatiea card unless said person has been duly authorized to issue a voter information registratiea ideatifieatiea card.
(3) It is unlawful for any person willfully to destroy or deface the information registratiea ideatifisatiea card of a duly registered voter.
Section 45. Effective upon becoming a law, subsection (7) is added to section 106.0705, Florida Statutes, to read:
106.0705 Electronic filing of campaign treasurer's reports.-
(7) Notwithstanding anvthing in law to the contrarv. any report required to have been filed under this section for the period ended March 31 2005.

44 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 24 of 26 PageID 190

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2()()5..278

shall be deemed to have been timely filed if the reoort is filed under this section on or before June 1 2005.
Section 46. Subsection (2) ofsection 106.08, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.08 Contributions; limitations on.-
(2Xa) A candidate may not accept contributions from national, state, including any subordinate committee of a national, state, or county committee of a political party, and county executive committees of a political party, which contributions in the aggregate exceed $50,000, no more than $25,000 of which may be accepted prior to the 28-day period immediately preceding the date of the general election.
(b) A candidate for statewide office may not accept contributions from national state or county executive committees of a political party including any subordinate committee of a national state, or county committee of a political party which contributions in the aggregate exceed $250 000. no more than $125.000 of which may be accented prior to the 28-day period immediately preceding the date of the general election. Polling services, research services, costs for campaign staff, professional consulting services, and telephone calls are not contributions to be counted toward the contribution limits of paragraph (a) or paragraph (b). Any item not expressly identified in this paragraph as nonallocable is a contribution in an amount equal to the fair market value ofthe item and must be counted as allocable toward the~ contribution limits of paragraph (a) or paragraph (b). Nonallocable, in-kind contributions must be reported by the candidate under s. 106.07 and by the political party under s. 106.29.
Section 47. Subsection (3) ofsection 106.33, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.33 Election campaign financing; eligibility.-Each candidate for the office of Governor or member of the Cabinet who desires to receive contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund shall, upon qualifying for office, file a request for such contributions with the filing officer on forms provided by the Division ofElections. If a candidate requesting contributions from the fund desires to have such funds distributed by electronic fund transfers, the request shall include information necessary to implement that procedure. For the purposes of ss. 106.30-106.36, candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor on the same ticket shall be considered as a single candidate. To be eligible to receive contributions from the fund, a candidate may not be an unopposed candidate as defined ins. 106.011(15) and must:
(3) Limit loans or contributions from the candidate's personal funds to $25,000 and contributions from national, state, and county executive committees ofa political party to $250.000$25,000 in the aggregate, which loans or contributions shall not qualify for meeting the threshold amounts in subsection (2).

45 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

Section 48. Section 106.34, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.34 Expenditure limits.-
(1) Any candidate for Governor and Lieutenant Governor or Cabinet officer who requests contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund shall limit his or her total expenditures as follows:
(a) Governor and Lieutenant Governor: $2.00 for each Florida-registered voter $5 milliea.
(b) Cabinet officer: $1.00 for each Florida-registered voter $2 milliBR.
(2) The expenditure limit for any candidate with primary election opposition only shall be 60 percent of the limit provided in subsection (1).
(3) For PuroOses of this section. "Florida-registered voter" means a yoter who is registered to vote in Florida as ofJune 30 ofeach odd-numbered year. The Division ofElections shall certify the total number ofFlorida-registered voters no later than July 31 of each odd-numbered year. Such total number shall be calculated by adding the number ofregistered voters in each county as of June 30 in the year of the certification date. For the 2006 general election. the Diyision of Elections shall certify the total number of Floridaregistered voters by July 31. 2005. The eliJIBRditln'l! limit shalllle adjasted lly the SeeFetaFy ef State EJaadFelmially te Fllileet the Fate ef iBilatiea 9F deilatiea as iadieated ia the CeasameF I'FieeladeK fuF <\ll UFllaa Ceasam llFS, Y S City *ueFage1 <\llltems, 1967-100, 9F saeeessllF FllpeFts as FllpeFted lly the umted States I>epar-tmeat ef l.alleF, EaFeaa ef l.alleF Statisties
(4) For the purposes of this section, the term "expenditure" does not include the payment of compensation for legal and accounting services rendered on behalf of a candidate.
Section 49. Section 196.141, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
196.141 Homestead exemptions; duty of property appraiser.-
W The property appraiser shall examine each claim for exemption filed with or referred to him or her and shall allow the same, if found to be in accordance with law, by marking the same approved and by making the proper deductions on the tax books.
(2) ThepFepeFty appFaiseF shalleKamiae eaeh FefeFFal, ef a peFsea Fegis teFiag te ·;ete at an addFilss dift'eFeat frem the eae vlheFe thepeFsea has filed fuF a hemestead eKemptiea, "'~eh has sees JlF9'Jided lly a sapeFir4seF ef eleetieas paFsaaat te s Qll.OlB The pFepeFty appFaiseF shall iaitiate pF9ee dQFIJs te teFmiBate a peFsea's hemestead eKempti9R aad assess lla0k taKes, if appFilpFiate, if the peFS9R elaimiBg sash eKemptiea is aet eatitled te the eKemflti9R nndeF lam,
Section 50. Subsection (4) of section 120.54, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

46 CODING: Words~ are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 25 of 26 PageID 191

Ch. 2005-278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

120.54 Rulemaking.-
(4) EMERGENCY RULES.-
(a) If an agency finds that an immediate danger to the public health, safety, or welfare requires emergency action, the agency may adopt any rule necessitated by the immediate danger. The agency may adopt a rule by any procedure which is fair under the circumstances if:
1. The procedure provides at least the procedural protection given by other statutes, the State Constitution, or the United States Constitution.
2. The agency takes only that action necessary to protect the public interest under the emergency procedure.
3. The agency publishes in writing at the time of, or prior to, its action the specific facts and reasons for finding an immediate danger to the public health, safety, or welfare and its reasons for concluding that the procedure used is fair under the circumstances. In any event, notice of emergency rules, other than those of educational units or units of government with jurisdiction in only one or a part of one county, including the full text of the rules, shall be published in the first available issue of the Florida Administrative Weekly and provided to the committee. The agency's findings of immediate danger, necessity, and procedural fairness shall be judicially reviewable.
(b) Rules pertaining to the public health, safety, or welfare shall include rules pertaining to perishable agricultural commodities or rules pertaining to the interoretation and implementation ofthe requirements of chapters 97 through 102 and 105 of the Election Code.
(c) An emergency rule adopted under this subsection shall not be effective for a period longer than 90 days and shall not be renewable, except during the pendency of a challenge to proposed rules addressing the subject of the emergency rule. However, the agency may take identical action by the rulemaking procedures specified in this chapter.
(d) Subject to applicable constitutional and statutory provisions, an emergency rule becomes effective immediately on filing, or on a date less than 20 days thereafter if specified in the rule, if the adopting agency finds that such effective date is necessary because of immediate danger to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Section 51. Subsection (1) of section 99.061, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
99.061 Method of qualifying for nomination or election to federal, state, county, or district office.-
(1) The provisions of any special act to the contrary notwithstanding, each person seeking to qualify for nomination or election to a federal, state, or multicounty district office, other than election to a judicial office as defmed in chapter 105 or the office ofschool board member, shall file his or her

47 CODING: Words stFieliea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2005·278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2005-278

qualification papers with, and pay the qualifying fee, which shall consist of the filing fee and election assessment, and party assessment, if any has been levied, to, the Department of State, or qualify by the alternative method with the Department of State, at any time after noon of the 1st day for qualifying, which shall be as follows: the 120th day prior to the first primary, but not later than noon ofthe 116th day prior to the date of the first primary, for persons seeking to qualify for nomination or election to federal office .!!I the office of the state attorney or oublic defender; and noon of the 50th day prior to the first primary, but not later than noon of the 46th day prior to the date of the first primary, for persons seeking to qualify for nomination or election to a state or multicounty district office. other than the office of state attorney or public defender.
Section 52. Subsection (4) of section 322.142, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
322.142 Color photographic or digital imaged licenses.-
(4) The department may maintain a film negative or print file. The department shall maintain a record of the digital image and signature of the licensees, together with other data required by the department for identification and retrieval. Reproductions from the file or digital record shall be made and issued only for departmental administrative purposes; for the issuance of duplicate licenses; in response to law enforcement agency requests; to the Department of State pursuant to an interagency agreement to facilitate determinations of eligibility ofvoter registration applicants and reJ:istered voters in accordance with ss. 98.045 and 98.075; to the Department of Revenue pursuant to an interagency agreement to facilitate service of process in Title IV-D cases; or to the Department of Financial Services pursuant to an interagency agreement to facilitate the location of owners of unclaimed property, the validation of unclaimed property claims, and the identification of fraudulent or false claims, and are exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1).
Section 53. Absentee ballots and voting· violations.-Any person who provides or offers to provide. and any person who accepts. a pecuniarv or other benefit in exchange for distributing, ordering. requesting, collecting. delivering. or otherwise physically oossessing absentee ballots with intent to alter change modifv or erase any vote on the absentee ballot except as provided in sections 101.6105-101.695 Florida Statutes. commits a felony of the third degree punishable as provided in section 775.082, section 775.083. or section 775.084. Florida Statutes.
Section 54. Subsection (1) of section 104.047. Florida Statutes. is repealed.
Section 55. Sections 98.055. 98.095. 98.0977. 98.0979. 98.101. 98.181.
98.231. 98.451 98.481. and 101.635 Florida Statutes. are repealed.
Section 56. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this act and except for this section, which shall take effect upon becoming a law, this act shall take effect January 1, 2006.

48 CODING: Words stFieliea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-2 Filed 07/27/12 Page 26 of 26 PageID 192

Ch. 2()()5..278

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Approved by the Governor June 20, 2005. Filed in Office Secretary of State June 20, 2005.

Ch. 2()()5..278

49 CODING: Words ~are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID 193
Exhibit 1c

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 13 PageID 194
Department of State Division of Elections
Powerpoint PresentationFLORIDA VOTER REGISTRATION
SYSTEM (FVRS) Election Legislation 2005
(HB 1589/1591)
Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections' Summer Conference 2005, Saddlebrook, Florida

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID 195

Florida Voter Registration System
Legislation and Operational Framework

What We Will Cover
> Overview of Roles and Responsibilities >Voter Registration Applications > List Maintenance Activities > Election Administration >Petitions > Uniformity and Enforcement > Public Records > Operation and Support

Bureau of Voter Registration Services

Voter Services
> Processing voter registration applications received by the Department. Once entered, the application will be immediately forwarded to the appropriate Supervisor of Elections.
>Responding to inquires pertaining to the status of voter registration applications and existing registrations.
>Coordination of updates to the street and
address data provided to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.

NVRA Coordinator
> Coordinates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Florida Voter Registration Act (FVRA).
> Preparation of the NVRA monthly report.
>Assures that voter registration applications, preference forms, and other publications are available and distributed to the required agencies that are mandatory voter registration sites.

Compliance and Regulation
> Review and assessment of compliance of voter registration records with state requirements.
> Monitoring of compliance with FVRS generated notifications.
> Response to workflow items escalated for review by state staff.

1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 13 PageID 196

Voter Registration Official
>You "just might be" (actually you are) a voter registration official if you are:
• A Supervisor of Elections • Someone authorized by the Secretary of State to
accept voter registration applications and execute updates to the statewide voter registration system

Changes to Application Form
The more things change, the more it changes things

Changes to Application Form (cont'd)
> New revised form to be adopted by rule
• Change in oath
• Check those boxes - No driver's license, ID no. or SSN ... Check
- U.S. citizen ... Check - Not a felon ... Check - Not adjudicated mentally incapacitated ... Check
• Update signature using form

Changes in Application Form (cont'd)
Homestead exemption language is eliminated
• MARG instructions:
- Never voted in the state (instead of county) - Not issued a current and valid Florida driver's license,
identification card or social security number as verified by the
State.
- Must provide identification at time of mail registration or prior to voting absentee or at the poll.
- Can no longer present entertainment card for identification

Changes to Processing of Applications
> The voter registration official receiving the application will enter the information into the FVRS
>All applications must be entered within 15 days of receipt
>Once entered, application is to be forwarded to the appropriate supervisor of elections

Changes to Processing of Applications <cent>
>DHSMV
• Applicant will verify an electronic application and provide a digital signature
• Application electronically transmitted to FVRS within 24 hours
• Paper applications sent within 5 days to supervisor of elections
• Declinations transmitted to FVRS

2
- - - - - - - - - - -------~-~--

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 13 PageID 197

Changes to Processing of Applications <cont>
>DHSMV (cont)
• Will retain complete records of information submitted to FVRS for audit purposes
• Will compare address information provided by applicant with street index - If address does not match, applicant will be asked to verify - DHSMV will not reject applications for which a match to the street index cannot be made

Changes to Processing of Applications <cont>
>Postmark clarification
• Postmark used to determine registration date is the postmark when mailed to DHSMV, a voter registration agency, armed forces recruitment office, the division or any supervisor

Changes to Processing of
Applications <cant>
>Validation of numbers
• HAVA requirement
• Can accept if person does not have a driver's license, Florida ID card or social security number
• DOS will verify authenticity of number or nonexistence of number
• If time does not allow validation to occur, person must vote a provisional ballot
Person has until 5 p.m. on 3rd day after election to produce evidence to SOE verifying authenticity of number

Changes to Processing of Applications <cont>
If application is complete and number validated, register applicant If application is complete and nonexistence of number is verified, register applicant • Once registered, deal with hits against other databases

Changes to Processing of Applications <cant>
> Incomplete Applications
• Check boxes relating to citizenship, felon and mental incapacity must be checked affirming status
• All required information must be complete by book closing
• Signature must be original or digital from DHSMV

Changes to Processing of Applications (cant)
>Notification to applicants
If incomplete - Not~y by mail within 5 business days after in FVRS - Must be remedied using a voter registration application form
• If denied - Inform applicant of reason for denial
• If complete - Send voter information card

3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 13 PageID 198

Changes to Processing of Applications (cont)
~ Voter information card Change in terminology Designed to provide information to voter vs. identification Will have unique identifier Do you need to send new card after 1/1/05?
~ MARG Registers by mail; Has not previously voted in the state (rather than county); and Has not been issued a Florida driver's license, identification card or social security number

Updates to Applications
~Address changes
If within same county -Telephone - Electronic -Signed, written notice
• Out of county - Voter registration application
• Can be done at polls on election day

Updates to Applications <cont>
~ Name or party change
• Voter registration application
~ New voter information card ~ Signature updates
For checking absentees and provisionals, change made before canvassing begins

Residential Address References
~ Supervisor of Elections will maintain a coordinate database of street addresses and send to FVRS.
~Compile and maintain a statewide electronic database of valid residential street addresses.
~ Department of State shall provide HSMV electronic database of street address.

Flow Chart

Retention of Application Forms
~ To be received and accepted by a voter registration official in any Florida county including the Department of State regardless of applicant's or registered voter's residency
~ To be entered into FVRS by the voter registration official who receives it
~ To be forwarded by the voter registration official who receives the fomn to the applicant's or voter's county of residence
~ To be retained pemnanently by the receiving voter registration official in the applicant's or voter's county of residence
4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 13 PageID 199

List Maintenance Activities Address Confirmation
l> Supervisor will continue with same biennial programs
Change of address infonnation - Supplied by USPS
- Identified from returned mail sent to all voters In county - Identified from retumed mail sent to voters not voting In last 2 years
- Jury notices, OHSMV or other sources Must be completed 90 days before a federal election
l> Only one address confirmation instead of two
Forwardable return-if-undeliverable mail • Postage prepaid preaddressed return fonn

List Maintenance Activities - Address Confirmation
~ Return Form If voter affirms change to another state, remove voter
• If voter affirms change to another county, update registration
• Voter must confirm if he has not changed address l> Inactive designations
If confirmation is returned as undeliverable • If return form not returned within 30 days

List Maintenance Activities Address Confirmation <cont>
~ Restore voter to active list if voter • Updates registration • Requests absentee ballot • Votes
l> Removal • If no activity by the second general election after being placed on inactive list
l> Reporting to Department

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.)
~ Duplicates • Most recent application is treated as an update
~ Deaths • Remove upon notification from Dept. of Health
l> Felons • Six step procedure for Notifying & Removing

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
l> Felons -Procedure for Notifying & Removing Step One
- FVRS conducts preliminary database comparisons to identify Potenttallneltglblllty (FDLE, Clerk of the Courts, DOC, US Attorney and Clemency Records)
Step Two
- FVRS staff obtains and reviews supporting documentation to make initial detennination of whether information is "Credible and Reliable"

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
l> Felons -Procedure for Notifying & Removing
(coni)
• Step Three
- If infonnation detennined Credible and Reliable, DOS notifies Supervisor and provides copies of the supporting documentation indicating the PotenUallnellglblllty to the Supervisor

5

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 13 PageID 200

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
~ Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing
(Cont.)
• Step Four - Upon notification that DOS has made Initial Determination of Credibility and Reliability, the Supervisor Follows the Procedures Outlined in the Statute Prtor to the Removal of Any Registered Voter
Step Five - Notification By Supervisor
• Notify voter of potential ineligibility by mail within 7 days of receipt of notice from DOS

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
~ Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing
Step Five- Notification (Cont.) - The mailed notice shall include: A statement of the basis for their potential ineligibility and
copies of the documentation upon which the potential Ineligibility is based A statement that failure to respond within 30 days may result in a determination of inetigibility and removal • A return form that requires the voter to admit or deny the accuracy of the information

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
~ Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (cont)
• Step Five- Notification (Cont.) - The mailed notice shall include: (cont) • A statement that If they are denying the accuracy of the information that they may request a hearing Instructions on how to contact the SOE in the county were they
are reglstered for assistance In resolving Instructions for seeking restoration of rights for a felony conviction, If applicable

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
:» Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (cant)
Step Five - Notification (Cont.) - If the mailed notice Is returned as undeliverable, SOE publishes
notice once In a paper of general circulation in the county where
last registered. - Published notice contains:
• Votets name & address Statement that they are potentially ineligible to vote Statement that failure to respond within 30 days after publicatiOn of notice may resuH in determination of ineligibility and removal Instruction to contact SOE within 30 days to receive Info re: basis for potential ineligibility and procedure to resolve Instruction to contact SOE if further assJstance is needed

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (cont)
Step Six- Determination of Eligibility by SOE FAILURE OF VOTER TO RESPOND TO NOTICES
- ~~e~~~ ~~~i:I,~Fn'~ ~~~~,,n:,c;~~~.'l."~~ifi~~fble or ~;:~~~~g~~~~~:?ng~R:':ll'e ~o'/::~~d~~~~~~ ':n~E
action.
VOTER RESPONDS AND ADMITS

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075, F.S.) (cont)
~ Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (cont)
Step Six- Determination of Eligibility by SOE (coni) VOTER DENIES ACCURACY OF INFORMATION BUT DOES NOT REQUEST HEARING
- If the voter responds and denies, but does not request a hearing, the SOE reviews the evidence and makes a final determination of eligibility.
- If determined ineligible, the SOE removes the voter and notifies the voter of the determination and action.

6

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 13 PageID 201

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
{s. 98.075, F.S.) {cont)
» Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing
(cont}
Step Six- Determination of Eligibility by SOE (coni)
VOTER DENIES ACCURACY OF INFORMATION AND REQUESTS A HEARING
- If a voter requests a hearing, SOE shall send a notice to the voter to attend a hearing at a time and place specified in the notice.
- After hearing all evidence the SOE makes a determination of eligibility. If detennined ineligible, the SOE removes the voter and notifies the voter of the determination and action.

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
{s. 98.075, F.S.) {coni)
J;> Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (coni)
Step Six- Detenmination of Eligibility by SOE {cont)
GENERAL PROVISIONS
- All determinations of eligibility shall be based upon a preponderance of evidence
-These proceedings are exempt from chapter 120
- NoUces shall be sent to voters by certifted mail, return receipt
requested, or other means that provides verification of receipt or shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation where the voter was last registered, whichever is applicable.

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
{s. 98.075, F.S.) {cont)
);> Felons - Procedure for Notifying & Removing (coni)
Step Six- Detenmination of Eligibility by SOE {cont)
GENERAL PROVISIONS (CONT.)
- SOE shall remove a voter only after the SOE makes a final determination that the voter Is Ineligible to vote
- Any voter who has been removed pursuant to a determination of Ineligibility may appeal that determination to circuit court pursuant to the procedures Ins. 98.0755
- Any voter who was removed due to ineligibility who subsequenUy becomes eligible must reregister to have name restored to the rolls

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
{s. 98.075, F.S.) {cont)
»Adjudication of Mental Incapacity - Procedure for Notifying & Removing
• SOE follows the same procedures as you do with potential felons
DOS will also follow the same steps previously described except the information and documentation will be coming from the clerk of court

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.075. F.S.) (coni)
» Information from Other Sources
If the DOS or the SOE receives information from sources other than the ones identified in the statute that a voter does not meet the age requirement, is not a U.S. citizen, is a fictitious person or has listed a residence that is not their legal address, the SOE shall, prior to removal of the voter from the rolls, follow the same notification procedures that we discussed related to potential felon ineligibility

List Maintenance- Ineligibility
(s. 98.0755, F.S.)
»Appeals Process
A SOE's determination of ineligibility under 98.075(7), F.S., is appealable to the circuit court for the county in which the voter is registered
• Time frames for filing these appeals are governed by the Rules of Appellate Procedure
The trial in the circuit court is de novo and governed by the rules of that court
• The voter bears the costs of the trial unless they can show that their name was erroneously or illeQally removed or that they are indigent. In those situations, the SOE pays the costs.

7

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 13 PageID 202

Election Administration
>Book Closing
No more certifications to DOS. We will be able to obtain that information from the FVRS
Updates after Book Closing (s. 97.055(1), FS.) - Only updates to voter's name, address and signature will be
pennitted for the upcoming election - VR applications and party changes must be accepted after
book closing, but only for purposes of subsequent eleclions

Election Administration
)>Precinct Registers- (s. 98.461 (2), F.S.)
• Allows use of an electronic database as a precinct register.
• Allows the use of an electronic device to capture voter signature and poll worker's initials
• Must include the "suffix" if the voter has one, ie. Sr, Jr, or Ill
)>Identification At the Polls- (s. 101.043, F.S.)
Entertainment cards are no longer acceptable • No affidavit if voter has no picture/signature ID. Voter
must vote a provisional ballot (HB 1567)

Election Administration
)> Early Voting
• Ballot has to reflect voter's precinct (s.101.657, F.S.)
)> Absentee Voting
System to track requests- will follow voter from county to county. Ballot has to reflect the voter's precinct (s. 101.64, F.S.)

Election Administration
)>Voter History Updates
Report to Legislature; Contents (s. 98.0981, F.S.) Effeclive August 1, 2006
• Within 75 days after a General Election or within 15 days after all SOE's have updated voter history info, whichever occurs later, DOS shall send to the President, Speaker, and Senate and House Minority Leaders an electronic report of all voters qualified to vote in the election or primary.

Election Administration
)>Voter History Updates
Report to Legislature; Contents (s. 98.0961, F.S.) (Cont.)
Report shall include: - The unique identifier of each voter - Contents of the voter registration application, except confidential or
exempt Information (required & optional) - Date of registration - Representative, senatorial and congressional districts of the voter
and precinct where voter resides - Method by which voter voted (precinct, ear1y, or absentee) or that
they did not vole - If absentee or provisional ballot of voter was not counted

Initiative Petitions
February 1 deadline • Record verification in FVRS
Petitions must still be submitted to proper county • After January 1, 2007 no need to send department
certificates

8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 13 PageID 203

Uniformity and Enforcement
~ Rulemaking
General Authority given in ss. 97.012(1) and (2), F.S.
- To "obtain and maintain uniformity in the interpretation and implementation of the election laws the Department may...adopt by rule uniform standards for the proper and equitable interpretation and implementation of the requirements of chapters 97- 102 and 105 of the Election Code."
- To "provide un~orm standards for the proper and equitable implementation of the registration laws by administrative rule.. ."

Uniformity and Enforcement
> Rulemaking (Cont.)
Specific Authority By Section
- Mandatory Rulemaking s. 97.052- Voter Registration Application Form s. 101.573(2) - Form for Use by SOEs for Filing of Election Results for Each Precinct with DOS

Uniformity and Enforcement
> Rulemaking (Cont.)
• Specific Authority By Section (Cont.)
- Discretionary Rulemaking • s. 97.026- Forms Available In Alternative Formats and Via the Internet • s. 97.061 - Special Registration for Electors Requiring Assistance In Voting Due to Inability to Read or Wrtte or Because of a Disability • s. 96.035- Governing Access, Use and Operation of the FVRS to Ensure Security, Uniformity and Integrity of the System

Uniformity and Enforcement
> Rulemaking (Cont.)
• Specific Authority By Section (Cont.)
- Discretionary Rulemaking (Cont.) • s. 96.045(5)- Prescribe Forms Necessary to Conduct Maintenance of Records In the FVRS • s. 96.075(1)- Adopt Uniform Standards and Procedures to Interpret and Administer Ust Maintenance Activities Relating to Registered Voter Ineligibility Determinations

Uniformity and Enforcement
>Rulemaking (Cont.)
Specific Authority By Section (Cont.)
- Emergency Rulemaking (s. 120.54(4)(b), F.S.)
• Change states that rules pertaining to the public health, safety or welfare include rules pertaining to the interpretation and implementation of the requirements of chapters 97 through 102 and 105 of the Election Code (This change Is helpful Wwe need to promulgate emergency rules to deal with unforeseen circumstances)

Uniformity and Enforcement
• Circuit Court Action (s. 97.012(14), F.S.) - The Secretary of State may bring civil actions to enforce the perfonnance of any duties of a county supervisor of elections or any official performing duties with respect to chapters 97 102 and 105 or to enforce compliance with a nule of the Department adopted to interpret or implement any of those chapters. - Venue for these suits shall be in the Circuit Court of Leon County.

9

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 13 PageID 204

Uniformity and Enforcement
Circuit Court Action (s. 97.012(14), F.S.) (Cont.)
- Suits filed by the Secretary within 60 days of an election (as
defined ins. 97.021, F.S.) or during the time period after the
election but before certification of the election shall be set for immediate hearing and given priority over other pending cases.
- Prior to filing a suit to enforce performance of the duties of an
SOE or an official, the Secretary or his or her designee must
make a good faith effort to confer with the SOE or official to ensure compliance.

"A Matter of Public Record"
• Refresher: Any material MADE or RECEIVED by a public agency in connection with OFFICIAL Business to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge
• Tapes, e-mails, documents, photographs, digital images, software, financial records, telephone logs, computer records, and election and voter registration records.

Exemptions From Public Records Voter Registration

Exempt?

Not Exempt?

Declinations to register Telephone nos

Exempt? SSNs

Not Exempt?
Voter registration records at local level

Exempt?
Fla. Driver's License No. or State Identification No.

Not Exempt? Signatures

Exempt? Absentee ballot request information

Not Exempt? FVRS

Exempt?
Location where a person registers or updates registration

Exemptions (conrd>
What Was and Will Still Be Exempt & Confidential:
• Declinations to register (s. 97.0585, F.S.) • Information as to where a person registered or
updated a registration (s. 97.0585, F.S.)

Exemptions

What Was Exempt From Copying:

What Will No Longer Be Exempt:

Voter registration records and books at the Supervisors of Elections' offices could be inspected but NOT COPIED except by certain governmental or political
entities who signed affirmation (s. 98.095, F.S.)
Telephone numbers (s. 97.0585(2), F.S.)

Voter registration records and books at the local offices of supervisors of elections and the Florida Voter Registration System can be INSPECTED &
COPIED (repeal of s. 98.095,
F.S.)
Telephone numbers can be INSPECTED & COPIED (repeal of part of s. 97.0585(2), F.S.

Exemptions (COill'd)

What Was Exempt from Copying Only:
Voter's signature
Voter's SSN
(only as they appeared in voter registration records)
s. 97.0585, F.S.)

WhatWI//Se Exempt & Confidential:
ApplicanWoter's signature (from copying only)
ApplicanWoter's SSN, Florida driver's license no. or identification no. (no copying, no inspection) (As this info appears In any registration or voting recorde.g., envelope/certificate for absentee balk>t, provisional ballot or early voting)

10

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-3 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 13 PageID 205

Exemptions <cont'd>
What Was and Will Still Be Exempt:
Names, addresses and telephone numbers of participants Address Confidentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence as contained in voter registration records retained at the local level but exemption now extends to that information as contained in registration records and voting records including that held in FVRS. (s. 741.465,
F.S.)

Exemptions <cont'd>

What Was Exempt & Confidential:

What Will Be Exempt & Confidential:

Absentee ballot request information except when requested by canvassing board, election official, political party, qualifying candidate for upcoming election and registered
political committees and CCE for political purposes only (s.101.62(3), F.S.)

The exemption remains the same except now the voter requesting the ballot information can also get the information and all absentee ballot request information must be sent in
electronic format to the Division of Elections daily at noon s.101.62(3), F.S.)

And s'more Exemptions
No change on all other applicable exemptions under the law including exemptions that are triggered by requests made by certain classes of professionals such as judges, attorneys, firefighters, law enforcement, human resource officers and local code enforcement officers (s. 119.07, 119.0711, 119.0712, and 119.0721, F.S.)

Public Records Retention
>General Retention Schedule GS-3
• All voter registration and voting records or documentation acquired from applicant or voter or other sources in determining eligibility
>Federal law
• Originals of certain records for minimum 22 months
>Consult with your public records management
official liaison, the department or your attorney when in doubt

11

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID 206
Exhibit 1d

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP
0

Document 22-4

Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 13 PageID 207 U.S. Departmentf Justice Civil Rights Division

JKT:JBG:ALP:maf DJ 166-012-3 2005-2390 2005-2391

Voting Section - NWB. 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20530

September 6, 2005

The Honorable Charlie Crist Attorney General State of Florida PL-01, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050
Dear Mr. Crist:
This refers to Chapters 277, 278, 279 and 286 (2005) ofthe Florida Legislature, the specific provisions of which are provided in Attachment A, submitted pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c. We received your submissions on July 8, 2005; supplemental information was received through August 26, 2005.
The Attorney General does not interpose any objection to the specified changes. However, we note that Section 5 expressly provides that the failure of the Attorney General to object does not bar subsequent litigation to enjoin the enforcement of the changes. In addition, as authorized by Section 5, we reserve the right to reexamine these submissions if additional information that would otherwise require an objection comes to our attention during the remainder of the sixtyday review period. Procedures for the Administration of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (28 C.F.R. 51.41 and 51.43).
Chapters 277 and 278 include provisions that are enabling in nature. Therefore, the State of Florida is not relieved of its responsibility to seek Section 5 review of any changes affecting voting proposed to be implemented pursuant to this legislation as noted in Attachment A with an asterisk(~, any rules prescribed by the Department of State for: filing an elections-fraud complaint and for investigating complaints; making forms available via alternative formats and

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID 208

0

0

-2-
via the internet; providing for changes to the uniform statewide voter registration application; governing the access use and the operation of the statewide voter registration system; governing maintenance of records in the statewide voter registration system; and interpreting and implementing the provisions ofF.S. Chapters 97 through 102 and 105). See 28 C.F.R. 51.15.

Attachment

•

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 13 PageID 209

0

0

Attachment A
This refers to certain acts of the Florida Legislature submitted pursuant to Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c. Your submission includes the following:
1. Chapter 277, Section 1 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 1 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.012, which pertains to the responsibilities ofthe Secretary of State*;
2. Chapter 277, Section 2 (2005), Chapter 278, Section 2 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 2 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.021, which pertains to the definition of terms for the purpose of the election code;
3. Chapter 277, Section 3 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 4 (2005) that amend F.S.97.051, which pertains to the oath used to register to vote;
4. Chapter 277, Section 4 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 5 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.052, which pertains to the uniform statewide voter registration application*;
5. Chapter 277, Section 5 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 6 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.053, which pertains to acceptance of voter registration applications;
6. Chapter 277, Section 6 (2005), Chapter 278, Section 8 (2005), and Chapter 286, Section 3 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.055, which pertains to the close of registration books for an election;
7. Chapter 277, Section 7 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.0575, which pertains to third party voter registration;
8. Chapter 277, Section 8 (2005), Chapter 278, Section 12 (2005), and Chapter 286, Section 4 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.071, which pertains to registration identification cards;
9. Chapter 277, Section 9 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 18 (2005) that amend F.S. 98.045, which pertains to the administration of voter registration*;
10. Chapter 277, Section 10 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 22 (2005) that amend F.S. 98.077, which pertains to the update of voter signatures;
11. Chapter 277, Section 11 (2005), Chapter 278, Section 51 (2005), and Chapter 286, Section 7 (2005) that amend F.S. 99.061, which pertains to the methods of qualifying for nomination or election to federal, state, county or district office;
12. Chapter 277, Section 12 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 8 (2005) that amend F.S. 99.063, which pertains to candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 13 PageID 210

0

0

Page -2-

13. Chapter 277, Section 13 (2005) that amends F.S. 99.092, which pertains to qualifying fees for candidates;
14. Chapter 277, Section 14 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 9 (2005) that amend F.S. 99.095, which pertains to the petition process in lieu of a qualifying fee and party assessment;
15. Chapter 277, Section 15 (2005) that amends F.S. 99.0955, which pertains to the place on the ballot of candidates with no party affiliation;
16. Chapter 277, Section 16 (2005) that amends F.S. 99.096, which pertains to the place on the ballot of minor political party candidates;
17. Chapter 277, Section 17 (2005) that amends F.S. 99.09651, which pertains to signature requirements for ballot position in year of apportionment;
18. Chapter 277, Section 18 (2005) that amends F.S. 100.101, which pertains to the opening and closing of polls;
19. Chapter 277, Section 19 (2005) that amends F.S. 100.101, which pertains to special elections and special primary elections;
20. Chapter 277, Section 20 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 13 (2005) that amend F.S. 100.111, which pertains to filling vacancies;
21. Chapter 277, Section 21 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 14 (2005) that amend F.S. 100.141, which pertains to the notice of a special election to fill any vacancy in office;
22. Chapter 277, Section 22 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.031, which pertains to the instructions for electors;
23. Chapter 277, Section 23 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 30 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.043, which pertains to identifications required at polls, provided that as set forth in your letter dated August 24, 2005, provisional ballots voted by persons who fail to present identification will be counted if the canvassing board finds that the signature on the voter certificate matches the signature on the voter registration record;
24. Chapter 277, Section 24 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 32 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.048, which pertains to provisional ballots;
25. Chapter 277, Section 25 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.049, which pertains to provisional ballots under special circumstances;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 13 PageID 211

0

0

Page -3-
26. Chapter 277, Section 26 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.051, which pertains to electors seeking assistance in casting ballots;
27. Chapter 277, Section 27 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.111, which pertains to challenges to voters;
28. Chapter 277, Section 28 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.131, which pertains to pollwatchers;
29. Chapter 277, Section 29 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.151, which pertains to the specifications for ballots;
30. Chapter 277, Section 30 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.171, which pertains to the availability of a copy of proposed constitutional amendments at voting locations;
31. Chapter 277, Section 31 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.294, which pertains to the purchase and sale of voting equipment;
32. Chapter 277, Section 32 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.295, which pertains to penalties for violation ofSections 101.292- 101.295;
33. Chapter 277, Section 33 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.49, which pertains to the procedure of election officers where signatures differ;
34. Chapter 277, Section 34 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.51, which pertains to requirement for the elector to occupy the voting booth alone;
35. Chapter 277, Section 35 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5606, which pertains to the requirements for approval of voting systems;
36. Chapter 277, Section 36 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5608, which pertains to voting by electronic or electromechanical methods;
37. Chapter 277, Section 37 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5612, which pertains to the testing of tabulation equipment;
38. Chapter 277, Section 38 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5614, which pertains to the canvass of returns;
39. Chapter 277, Section 39 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.572, which pertains to public inspection of ballots;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 13 PageID 212

0

0

Page -4-
40. Chapter 277, Section 40 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.58, which pertains to supervising and observing the voter registration and election processes;
41. Chapter 277, Section 41 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.595, which pertains analysis and reports of voting problems;
42. Chapter 277, Section 42 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.6103, which pertains to the mail ballot election procedure;
43. Chapter 277, Section 43 (2005), Chapter 278, Section 37 (2005), and Chapter 286, Section 16 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.62, which pertains to requests for absentee ballots;
44. Chapter 277, Section 44 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 38 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.64, which pertains to the delivery of absentee ballots and envelopes;
45. Chapter 277, Section 45 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 39 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.657, which pertains to early voting;
46. Chapter 277, Section 46 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 40 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.663, which pertains to the change of residence of an elector;
47. Chapter 277, Section 47 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.68, which pertains to canvassing absentee ballots;
48. Chapter 277, Section 48 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.69, which pertains to voting in person and the return of absentee ballots;
49. Chapter 277, Section 49 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 42 (2005) that amend F.S. 101.6923, which pertains to special absentee ballot instructions for certain first time voters;
50. Chapter 277, Section 50 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5694, which pertains to the mailing of ballots upon receipt of federal postcard application;
51. Chapter 277, Section 51 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.697, which pertains to the electronic transmission of election materials;
52. Chapter 277, Section 52 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 43 (2005) that amend F.S. 102.012, which pertains to the inspectors and clerks who conduct the election;
53. Chapter 277, Section 53 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 17 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.014, which pertains to pollworker recruitment and training;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 13 PageID 213

0

0

Page -5-
54. Chapter 277, Section 54 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.031, which pertains to the maintenance of good order at the polls;
55. Chapter 277, Section 55 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.071, which pertains to the tabulation of votes and proclamation of results;
56. Chapter 277, Section 56 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.111, which pertains to the Election Canvassing Commission;
57. Chapter 277, Section 57 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.112, which pertains to the deadline of submission of county returns to the Department of State;
58. Chapter ~77, Section 58 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.141, which pertains to the duties of the county canvassing board*;
59. Chapter 277, Section 59 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.166, which pertains to manual recounts;
60. Chapter 277, Section 60 (2005) that amends F.S. 102.168, which pertains to contest of an election;
61. Chapter 277, Section 61 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 18 (2005) that amend F.S. 103.021, which pertains to nomination for presidential electors;
62. Chapter 277, Section 62 (2005) that amends F.S. 103.051, which pertains to establishment of meeting dates and times for presidential electors;
63. Chapter 277, Section 63 (2005) that amends F.S. 103.061, which pertains to the meeting of electors and filling of vacancies;
64. Chapter 277, Section 64 (2005) that amends F.S. 103.121, which pertains to the powers and duties ofparty executive committees;
65. Chapter 277, Section 65 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 21 (2005) that amend F.S. 105.031, which pertains to the items to be filed for candidate qualification;
66. Chapter 277, Section 66 (2005) that amends F.S. 105.035, which pertains to the petition process;
67. Chapter 277, Section 67 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.022, which pertains to the appointment and duties of a registered agent;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 13 PageID 214

0

0

Page -6-
68. Chapter 277, Section 68 (2005) and Chapter 278, Section 46 (2005) that amend F.S. 106.08, which pertains to limitations on contributions;
69. Chapter 277, Section 69 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.24, which pertains to the membership, powers and duties of the Florida Election Commission;
70. Chapter 277, Section 70 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.141, which pertains to the disposition of surplus funds by candidates;
71. Chapter 277, Section 71 (2005) which transfers and renumbers F.S. 98.122 as 106.165;
72. Chapter 277, Section 72 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.22, which pertains to the duties of the Division of Elections;
73. Chapter 277, Section 73 (2005) that amends F.S. 16.56, which pertains to the Office of Statewide Prosecution;
74. Chapter 277, Section 74 (2005) that amends F.S. 119.07, which pertains to the inspection and copying ofballots;
75. Chapter 277, Section 75 (2005) that amends F.S. 145.09, which pertains to the Supervisor of Elections*;
76. Chapter 277, Section 76 (2005) that amends F.S. 104.0615, which pertains to the suppression and prohibition of vote intimidation and creates the Voter Protection Act;
77. Chapter 277, Section 77 (2005) the repeal Sections 98.095, 98.0979, 98.181, 98.481, 101.253, 101.635, 102.061, 106.085, and 106.144;
78. Chapter 278, Section 3 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.026, which pertains to election forms to be available in alternative formats and via the internet;*
79. Chapter 278, Section 7 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.0535, which pertains to special requirements for certain voter registration applicants;
80. Chapter 278, Section 9 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.057, which pertains to voter registration by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles;
81. Chapter 278, Section 10 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.058, which pertains to voter registration agencies*;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 13 PageID 215

0

0

Page -7-
82. Chapter 278, Section 11 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.061, which pertains to special registration for electors requiring assistance*;
83. Chapter 278, Section 13 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.073, which pertains to the disposition of voter registration applications;
84. Chapter 278, Section 14 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 5 (2005) that amend F.S. 97.1 031, which pertains to the notice of change of residence, change of name or change or party affiliations;
85. Chapter 278, Section 15 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.105, which pertains to the establishment of a permanent single registration system;
86. Chapter 278, Section 16 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.015, which pertains to the duties ofthe supervisor of elections;
87. Chapter 278, Section 17 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.035, which pertains to the statewide voter registration system*;
88. Chapter 278, Section 19 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.065, which pertains to registration list maintenance program;
89. Chapter 278, Section 20 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.075, which pertains to voter registration records maintenance activities*;
90. Chapter 278, Section 21 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.0755, which pertains to the appeal of a determination of ineligibility;
91. Chapter 278, Section 23 (2005) and Chapter 286, Section 6 (2005) that amend F.S. 98.081, which pertains to names removed from the statewide voter registration system;
92. Chapter 278, Section 24 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.093, which pertains to the duty of officials to furnish lists of deceased persons, persons adjudicated mentally incapacitated, and person convicted of a felony;
93. Chapter 278, Section 25 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.0981, which pertains to the statewide voter registration database;
94. Chapter 278, Section 26 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.212, which pertains requirements for the Department of State and county supervisors to furnish statistical and other information regarding election results and voter registration;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 13 PageID 216

0

0

Page -8-

95. Chapter 278, Section 27 (2005) that amends F.S. 98.461, which pertains to the contents of the voter registration application and precinct register;

96. Chapter 278, Section 28 (2005) that amends F.S. 100.371, which pertains to the placement of initiatives on ballots;

97. Chapter 278, Section 29 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.001, which pertains to precinct boundaries and polling places;

98. Chapter 278, Section 31 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.045, which pertains to the requirement that electors be registered in a precinct and provisions for residence or name changes;

99. Chapter 278, Section 33 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.161, which pertains to ballots for referenda;

100. Chapter 278, Section 34 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.56062, which pertains to the

standards for accessible voting systems;

'

101. Chapter 278, Section 35 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.5608, which pertains to procedures for voting by electronic or electromechanical methods*;

102. Chapter 278, Section 36 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.573, which pertains to the record of election results, by precinct*;

103. Chapter 278, Section 41 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.6921, which pertains to the delivery of special absentee ballots to certain first time voters;

104. Chapter 278, Section 44 (2005) that amends F.S. 104.013, which pertains to the unauthorized use, possession or destruction of voter information cards;

105. Chapter 278, Section 45 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.0705, which pertains to the electronic filing of campaign treasurer's report;

106. Chapter 278, Section 47 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.33, which pertains to election campaign financing;

107. Chapter 278, Section 48 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.34, which pertains to campaign expenditure limits;

108. Chapter 278, Section 49 (2005) that amends F.S. 196.141, which pertains to the duty of the property appraiser in cases of homestead exemptions;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 13 PageID 217

0

0

Page -9-
109. Chapter 278, Section SO (2005) that amends F.S. 120.54, which pertains to rulemaking*;
110. Chapter 278, Section 52 (2005) that amends F.S. 322.142, which pertains to color photographic or digitally imaged licenses;
111. Chapter 278, Section 53 (2005) that creates a new law, which pertains to violations of absentee ballot and voting laws;
112. Chapter 278, Section 54 (2005) that repeals Subsection 1 of F.S. 104.047, which pertains to the electronic filing of campaign treasurer's report;
113. Chapter 278, Section 55 (2005) that repeals Sections 98.055, F.S., relating to voter registration list maintenance forms; 98.095, F.S., relating to county voter registers; 98.0977, F.S., relating to the statewide voter registration database and its operation and maintenance; 98.0979, F.S., relating to inspection of the statewide voter registration database; 98.101, F.S., relating to specifications for permanent registration binders, files, and forms; 98.181, F.S., relating to duty of the supervisor of elections to make up indexes or records; 98.231, F.S., relating to duty of the supervisor of elections to furnish the department with the number of registered electors; 98.451, F.S., relating to automation in processing voter registration data; 98.481, F.S., relating to challenges to electors; 101.635, F.S., relating to distribution ofblocks of printed ballots;
114. Chapter 279, Section 1 (2005) that amends F.S. 97.0585, which pertains to public record exemptions and information regarding voters;
115. Chapter 279, Section 2 (2005) that amends F.S. 741.465, which pertains to public record exemptions for the Address Confidentiality Program for Victims ofDomestic Violence;
116. Chapter 286, Section 1 (2005) that repeals F.S.100.091 and 100.096, which pertains to the second primary election;
117. Chapter 286, Section 10 (2005) that amends F.S. 99.103, which pertains to the Department of State's remittance of a portion of the filing fee and party assessment of candidates;
118. Chapter 286, Section 11 (2005) that amends F.S. 100.061, which pertains to primary elections;
119. Chapter 286, Section 12 (2005) that amends F.S. 100.081, which pertains to nomination of county commissioners at the primary election;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-4 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 13 PageID 218

0

0

Page -10-
120. Chapter 286, Section 15 (2005) that amends F.S. 101.252, which pertains to the candidates that are entitled to have their names printed on the ballot;
121. Chapter 286, Section 19 (2005) that amends F.S. 103.022, which pertains to write in candidates for President and Vice President;
122. Chapter 286, Section 20 (2005) that amends F.S. 103.091, which pertains to political parties;
123. Chapter 286, Section 22 (2005) that amends F.S. 105.041, which pertains to the form of ballots;
124. Chapter 286, Section 23 (2005) that amends F.S. 105.051, which pertains to determinations of election or retention to an office;
125. Chapter 286, Section 24 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.07, which pertains to reports of contributions;
126. Chapter 286, Section 25 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.08, which pertains limitations on contributions;
127. Chapter 286, Section 26 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.29, which pertains to reports on contributions and expenditures by political parties.
128. Chapter 278, Section 46 (2005) that amends F.S. 106.8, which pertains to campaign finance contribution limitations.
* Includes enabling legislation

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 219
Exhibit 2a

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2SEoCf T7IOPNag5eISDU2B2M0!SSION
NO.~ '20[{-Q2 1~?

RICK SCOTT Governor

of fL9RIDA DEPARTMENT STATE
KURT S. BROWNING Secretary of State

June 8, 2011

Mr. Chris Herren Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division United States Department of Justice, Room 7254-NWB 1800 G Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20530
RE: Preclearance submission for chapter 2011-40, Laws ofFlorida (CS/CS/HB 1355)
Dear Mr. H erren:

. · - --") 0

Pursuant to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, as amended, we submit for review and preclearance chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida (CS/CS/HB 1355) ("An act relating to elections. .."). This law amends several provisions of the Florida Election Code, which encompass chapters 97 through 106 of the Florida Statutes. This legislation became law on May 19, 2011.

This submission is made by the Secretary of State on behalf of the five Florida counties (Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough and Monroe) that are required to obtain preclearance before implementing any new standard, practice, or procedure that affects voting (the "preclearance counties").

We seek your determination that chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, does not have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account or race, color, or language minority group.

This submission accompanying this letter follows the format of 28 C.F.R. section 51.27. We respectfully request that any correspondence regarding this submission include the record file number assigned by the Department of Justice in order for us to better track this file. Should you require any additional information to complete your review, please do not hesitate to ask.

R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6536 • Facsimile: (850) 245-6127 www.dos.state.fl.us

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 7 PageID 221 PRECLEARANCE SUBMISSION: CHAPTER 2011-40, LAWS OF FLORIDA
In accordance with the format in 28 C.P.R. section 51.27, and on behalf of Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough and Monroe Counties, the Florida Department of State submits the following materials related to chapter 2011- 40, Laws of Florida. The underlying bill was Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute for House Bill1355 ("CS/CS/HB 1355").
a) A copy of the law embodying change affecting voting.
Exhibit A contains a copy of chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, which is also available at:
http:/ /laws.flrules.org/2011 I 40
b) A copy of the law embodying voting practice that is proposed to be repealed, amended, or otherwise changed.
Exhibit B consists of the Florida Election Code (chapters 97-106, Florida Statutes) which is available by searchable online link at:
http:I I election.dos.state.fl.usI publications/pdf/2010/201OElectionLaws.pdf
Exhibit B also includes sections 112. 312, 876.05, and 876.07, Florida Statutes, which were amended by chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, but are codified outside the Florida Election Code.
c) Statement of the change explaining the difference between the submitted change and the prior law or practice.
Exhibit Cis a compilation of legislative materials relating to CS/CS/HB 1355 which is also available online at:
• The Florida House and Senate bill history and the Florida House staff analysis:
http: I I www.myfloridahouse.gov I SectionsI BillsI billsdetail.aspx?Billld=46543&Sessionlndex=l&Sessionid=66&BillText=&BillNumber=1355&BillSponsorlndex=O&BillListlndex=O&BillStatuteText=&BillT ypelndex=O&BillReferredlndex=O&HouseChamber=H&BillSearchlndex=O
• The Florida Senate 2011 End-of-Session Bill Summary:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Committees/BillSummaries/2011/htmi/1355EE
• The Florida House 2011 End-of Session Bill Summary:
t http: I www.myfloridahouse.govI SectionsI DocumentsI loaddoc.aspx?PublicationType=Session&Committe
eld=&Session=2011&DocumentType=End of Session Summaries&FileName=2011 End Of Session Summary.pdf
Exhibit D consists of the Senate bill history and staff analysis for CSJCSfHB 2086 which was the Senate companion to CS/CS/HB 1355 and laid on the table for that bill. The materials may be helpful for explaining differences that are not otherwise addressed in the staff analysis for CS/CS/HB 1355 but which became a part of the bill in the final days. http:/ /www.flsenate.gov /Session/Bill/2011/2086
Exhibit Eisa section-by-section description of chapter law 2011-40, Laws of Florida, prepared by the Department of State.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 7 PageID 222 d) The name, title, address, and telephone number of the person making the submission:
Secretary Kurt S. Browning Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building, 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 (850) 245-6200
e) The name of the submitting authority and the name of the jurisdiction for the change.
The Florida Department of State submits this request on behalf of the five designated preclearance counties in Florida: Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe.
f) Name of county and state submitting this request.
See response to paragraph e).
g) Identification of the person or body responsible for the change and mode of decision.
The 2011 Florida Legislature acted pursuant to its authority to legislate. See ss. 6 and 7, Article Ill, Florida Constitution. Legislation may originate in either chamber. On May 6, 2011, the House of Representatives and the Senate, passed CS/CS/HB 1355 by the constitutionally mandated majority vote. After the bill was signed by each of the presiding officer in each house and by the Secretary of the Senate and the clerk of the House of Representatives, the bill was presented to the Governor on the same day. The Governor signed the bill into law within 15 days of receiving the bill and the bill became law on May 19,2011. See section 8 of Article III of the Florida Constitution.
Link to searchable online database to Florida Constitutionhttp:1/www.leg.state.fl. us/5tatu tes/index. cfm ?Mode= Constitu tion&Submenu=3&Tab=statu tes&CFID=2084 78549& CFTOKEN=66662854#A3506
h) Statement identifying the statutory or other authority under which the jurisdiction undertakes the change and description of procedures to follow in deciding to undertake change.
The Secretary of State is the state's chief elections officer. See section 97.012, Florida Statutes. The actual conduct of the elections is the constitutional and statutory responsibility of the 67 county supervisors of elections who are constitutionally elected officers (with the exception of Miami-Dade County's Supervisor, who is appointed). See section 1, article VIII, Florida Constitution. Their duties are set forth throughout the Florida Election Code, but primarily in section 98.015, Florida Statutes.
See also section 1, article VIII, Fla. Const.
http:llwww.leg.state.fl.usiStatuteslindex.cfm?Mode=Constitution&Submenu=3&Tab=statutes&CFID=208533739&C FTOKEN =70920111 #AS
See link to searchable Florida Election Code
http: II election.dos.state.fl.us I publicationsI pdf120101201OElectionLaws.pdf

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 7 PageID 223 i) The date of adoption of the change affecting voting.
Except as otherwise expressly stated in chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, most of the provisions became effective on May 19, 2011, when the bill was signed into law. See section 80 of chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida.
j) The date on which the change is to take effect.
See response to paragraph i).
k) A statement that the change has not yet been enforced or administered, or an explanation of why such a statement cannot be made.
The changes have not yet been enforced or administered in the five Florida counties subject to preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
At this time, elections are scheduled as follows for the preclearance counties: Collier County: November 22,2011- City of Everglades Hardee: None for remainder of 2011 Hendry: None for remainder of 2011 Hillsborough: None for remainder of 2011 Monroe: October 4, 2011- City of Key West
November 8, 2011- City of Layton and City of Marathon
I) Where the change will affect less than the entire jurisdiction, explain scope.
The changes affect all 67 counties in Florida, including the five preclearance counties.
m) Statement of the reasons for change.
Exhibit F contains the general and specific links to the chronological listing of audiovisual or audio podcasts or recordings of the committee meetings and floor sessions that related to CS/CS/HB 1355.
• http:llwww.myfloridahouse.govISectionsiPodCastsiPodCasts.aspx • http:II www.myfloridahouse.govISectionsiHouseCalendarlbroadcast.aspx • http:llwww.flsenate.gov1MediaiVideosiSessionl1
• April1, 2011: House Government Operations Subcommittee-
http:// www.myfloridahouse.govIFileStoresiAdHoc1PodCastsl04 01 20111Government Operations 2011 04 01.mp3
Link to meeting package, see page 8-
<http: II www.myfloridahouse.govI SectionsI Documents lloaddoc.aspx?PublicationType=Committees&Committ eeld=2622&Session=2011&DocumentType=Action%20Packets&FileName=Gov%200ps %20Sub%204-1-2011.pdf
• April14, 2011: House State Affairs Committee-
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov IFileStoresiAdHociPodCastsl04 14 2011/State Affairs 2011 04 14.mp3
Link to meeting package, see page 20-
<http: II www.myfloridahouse.govI SectionsI Documents lloaddoc.aspx?PublicationType=Committees&Committ eeld=2589&Session=2011&DocumentType=Action% 20Packets&FileName=State %20Affairs %20Action %20Packet%
20-%2004-14-11.pdf> - Pg 20

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 7 PageID 224 • April20, 2011: House Floor session<http://streams.Ieg.state.fl.us/archive/HIGH/H HSES 2011 04 20 8711.asx> - Bill starts at 4 hours 17 min. Lasts until the end of video.
• April21, 2011: House Floor debate (passage)-
http://streams.leg.state.fl.us/archive/HIGH/H HSES 2011 04 21 8718.asx
• May 4, 2011: Senate Floor debate<http://streams.leg.state.fl.us/archive/HIGH/S SSES 2011 05 04 8818.asx> - - Bill starts at the beginning. Lasts until around 1 hour 29 min.
• May 5, 2011: Senate Floor debate (passage with amendments; back to House)
http://streams.leg.state.fl.us/archive/MBR/S SSES 2011 05 05 8823.asx http://streams.leg.state.fl.us/archive/MBR/S SSES 2011 05 05 8824.asx
• May 5, 2011: House Floor debate-(final passage)
http://streams.leg.state.fl.us/archive/MBR/H HSES 2011 05 05 8825.asx
n) A statement of the anticipated effect of the change on members of racial or language minorities.
The 2011legislative changes to the Florida Election Code will apply equally to all voters, regardless of racial or language minority status.
o) A statement identifying any past or pending litigation concerning the change or related voting practices. On June 3, 2011, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida seeking an injunction to prevent implementation of Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, in any of Florida's 67 counties, until preclearance has been obtained for the five counties subject to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, as amended. See Sullivan v. Browning, Civ. No. 1:11-cv-10047-KMM.
As stated in paragraph k, above, the changes to voting practices and procedures contained in Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, have not been enforced or administered in the five preclearance counties, nor will these changes be enforced or administered in these counties pending preclearance.
p) A statement that the prior practice has been precleared.
The elections legislation revises existing provisions that have been precleared at various times in the past. However, the legislation also creates some new provisions for which this submission represents a first-time preclearance review.
q) For redistricting and annexations: the items listed under s. 51.28(a)(l) and (b)(l); for annexations only, the items listed under s. 51.28(c)(3).
Not applicable.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-5 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 7 PageID 225 r) Other information required for evaluation.
Exhibit G contains 2008 and 2010 General Elections Demographics and Voting History for the five preclearance counties in a tab-delimited format.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 45 PageID 226
Exhibit 2b

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 45 PageID 227

CHAPTER 2011-40
Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 1355
An act relating to elections; amending s. 97.012, F.S.; expanding the list of responsibilities of the Secretary of State when acting in his or her capacity as chief election officer; amending s. 97.021, F.S.; redefining the term "minor political party"; amending s. 97.025, F.S.; replacing a requirement for the Department o( State to print copies of a pamphlet containing the Election Code with a requirement that the pamphlet be made available; amending s. 97.0575, F.S.; requiring that third-party voter registration organizations register with the Division of Elections and provide the division with certain information; requiring that the division or a supervisor of elections make voter registration forms available to third·party v:oter registration organizations; requiring that such forms contain certain information; requiring that the division maintain a database of certain information; requiring supervisors of elections to provide specified information to the division in a format and at times required by the division; requiring that such information be updated and made public daily at a specified time; requiring third-party voter registration organizations to deliver collected voter registration applications within a specified period; revising penalty provisions to conform; specifYing grounds for an affirmative defense to a violation of timely submission requirements; providing for the referral ofviolations to the Attorney General; authorizing the Attorney General to initiate a civil action; providing that an action for relief may include a permanent or temporary injunction, a restraining order, or any other appropriate order; requiring that the division adopt rules for specified purposes; providing for retroactive application ofcertain requirements applicable to third-party voter registration organizations; deleting provisions providing for fines to be in addition to criminal penalties; deleting provisions providing a continuing appropriation of the proceeds of fines; amending s. 97.071, F.S.; requiring that voter information cards contain the address of the polling place of the registered voter; requiring a supervisor of elections to issue a new voter information card to a voter upon a change in a voter's address of legal residence or a change in a voter's polling place address; providing instructions for implementation by the supervisors of elections; amending s. 97.073, F.S.; requiring a supervisor to notifY an applicant within 5 business days regarding disposition of the voter registration applications; amending s. 97.1031, F.S.; revising the methods by which a person must update his or her voter registration due to a change of address; revising procedures for an elector to change his or her party affiliation; requiring an elector to notifY the supervisor of elections when the elector changes his or her name; amending s. 98.075, F.S.; revising procedures for the removal of deceased persons and other potentially ineligible persons from the statewide voter registration system; amending s. 98.093, F.S.; revising requirements for the Department of Corrections to provide the Department of State with
1 CODING: Words striekeB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

information relating to convicted felons; requiring the Florida Parole Commission to regularly furnish data to the Department of State relating to persons who have been granted clemency; amending s. 98.0981, F.S.; providing timeframes and formats for voting history information to be sent by the supervisors of elections to the department; providing timeframes and formats for voting history information to be sent by the department to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the respective minority leaders; requiring submission of precinct-level information in a certain format by a time certain; amending s. 99.012, F.S., relating to restrictions on individuals qualifYing for public office; providing that if a final court order determines that a person did not comply with specified provisions, the person is not qualified as a candidate and his or her name may not appear on ballot; providing for nonapplicability to presidential and vice presidential candidates; amending s. 99.021, F.S.; revising the candidate oath requirement for a person seeking to qualifY for nomination or election or as a candidate of a political party; removing a requirement for the qualifYing officer to provide a printed copy of the candidate oath; removing a requirement for taking the public employee oath; clarifYing that candidates for Unites States President and Vice President need not subscribe certain oaths; correcting references for other oaths; amending s. 99.061, F.S.; revising.the timeframe for a candidate to pay a qualifYing fee under certain circumstances; requiring checks to be payable as prescribed by the filing officer; requiring signatures on certain oaths to be verified; removing a requirement for a public employee oath; requiring the filing of a verified notarized financial disclosure statement; clarifying the time for qualifYing papers to be received; providing that the qualifYing officer performs a ministerial duty only; exempting a decision by the qualifying officer from the Administrative Procedure Act; amending s. 99.063, F.S.; requiring a candidate's oath to be verified; deleting a requirement for a candidate to file a loyalty oath with the Department of State by a certain date; amending s. 99.092, F.S.; providing for the transfer of the election assessment to the Elections Commission Trust Fund; amending s. 99.093, F.S.; providing for the election assessments paid by a person seeking to qualifY for a municipal office to be forwarded by the qualifying officer to the Florida Elections Commission; amending s. 99.095, F.S.; allowing a candidate to obtain the required number of signatures from any registered voter regardless of district boundaries in a year of apportionment; amending s. 99.097, F.S.; providing for the Department of State to adopt rules to verifY petitions through random sampling; creating exceptions for certain petitions from the authorization to use random sampling to verifY petitions; revising criteria that a
supervisor of elections must use to determine whether a petition may be
counted as valid; providing that an exemption from paying fees to verifY petitions does not apply if a person has been paid to solicit signatures; providing that contributions received after the filing of an undue burden oath must first be used to pay fues for veril'ying petitions; amending s. 100.061, F.S.; increasing the time period between a primary election and a general election; amending s. 100.101, F.S.; conforming a provision to changes made by the act; amending s. 100.111, F.S.; deleting provisions
2 CODING: Words striekeB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 45 PageID 228

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

relating to vacancies in a state or county office because an incumbent qualified as a candidate for federal office; providing for a filing officer, rather than the Department of State, to notify a political party that it may nominate a person for office if certain events cause the party to have a vacancy in nomination; revising provisions relating to the filling of a vacancy in a nomination; deleting a defined term; providing that a vacancy in nomination is not created as the result ofcertain court orders; amending s. 100.371, F.S.; deleting provisions relating to a right to revoke a signature on an initiative petition; reducing the time period for which a signed and dated initiative petition form is valid; requiring an initiative sponsor to submit· an initiative form to the supervisor of elections for the county of residence of the person signing the form for verification; providing procedures for misfiled petitions; revising criteria for a supervisor of elections to verify a signature on an initiative petition form; deleting provisions relating to petition signature revocations; amending s. 101.001, F.S.; requiring the supervisors of elections to provide the department with precinct data including specified infOrmation; requiring the department to maintain a searchable database containing certain precinct and census block information; requiring supervisors of elections to notify the department of precinct changes within a specified time; deleting a waiver; amending s. 101.043, F.S.; replacing references to the word "voter" with "elector"; providing that the address on an elector's identification may not be used to confirm or challenge an elector's legal residence; providing that the elector may not be asked to provide additional information or to recite his or her home address under certain circumstances; amending s. 101.045, F.S.; permitting a change of residence at the polling place for a person changing residence within a county; providing that a person whose change of address is from outside the county may not change his or her legal residence at the polling place or vote a regular ballot but may vote a provisional ballot; providing an exception; amending s. 101.131, F.S.; revising procedures for the designation ofpoll watchers; requiring that the Division of Elections prescribe a form for the designation of poll watchers; providing conditions under which poll watchers are authorized to enter polling areas and watch polls; requiring that a supervisor of elections provide identification to poll watchers by a specified period before early voting begins; requiring that poll watchers display such identification while in a polling place; amending s. 101.151, F.S.; authorizing the use of ballot-on-demand technology to produce election-day ballots; deleting a requirement that the use of such technology be authorized in writing by the Secretary of State; revising provisions relating to ballot headings and the order of candidates appearing on a ballot; amending s. 101.161, F.S.; requiring the Department of State to provide the supervisors of elections either a ballot summary to a joint. resolution to amend the State Constitution or the full text of the amendment or revision if a ballot summary is not included in the joint resolution; providing that a joint resolution may include multiple ballot statements set forth in order of priority; providing requirements for ballot statements; detailing responsibilities of the Department of State with respect to providing ballot information to supervisors of elections; prescribing the styling of ballot
3 CODING: Words stfteken are deletions; words~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

statements; specifying a time period and procedures to initiate an action to challenge an amendment to the State Constitution proposed by the Legislature; requiring the court, including an appellate court, to accord the case priority over other cases; requiring the Attorney General to revise a ballot title or ballot summary for an amendment proposed by the Legislature under certain circumstances; providing a 10-day deadline and procedures for challenging revised ballot titles or summaries; requiring the Department of State to forward modified ballot language to supervisors of elections; creating a presumption of validity of a ballot statement that contains the full text of an amendment or revision; providing for retroactive application of the amendments to s. 101.161, F.S.; amending s. 101.5605, F.S.; requiring an electromechanical voting system to satisfy the standards for certification adopted by rule of the Department of State; amending s. 101.5606, F.S.; deleting requirements for electromechanical voting systems to have the capability to produce precinct totals in marked or punched form; amending s. 101.56075, F.S.; providing that all voting systems utilized after a certain time shall permit placement on the ballot of the full text of a constitutional amendment or revision; amending s. 101.5612, F.S.; revising the sample size of electromechanical voting systems that include the electronic or electromechanical tabulation devices to be tested; amending s. 101.5614, F.S.; deleting provisions relating to the use of ballot cards and write-in ballots or envelopes; amending s. 101.591, F.S.; removing the audit requirement by the canvassing board if a manual recount is undertaken; amending s. 101.62, F.S.; extending the validity of an absentee ballot request to include all elections to the end ofthe calendar year of the second ensuing regularly scheduled general election; revising the timeframe for supervisors to electronically update absentee ballot request information; specifying types of elections for which a supervisor of elections must send an absentee ballot to uniformed services voters and overseas voters; specifying a time period during which a supervisor of elections must begin mailing absentee ballots; removing requirements that an elector provide certain information when requesting an absentee ballot from the county supervisor of elections; amending s. 101.65, F.S.; revising the form of the instructions to absent electors; stating that an absentee ballot is considered illegal ifthe signature on the voter's certificate does not match the signature on record; providing instructions for updating a signature on a voter registration application; amending s. 101.657, F.S.; requiring the supervisor of elections to provide to the division the address and hours of operation of early voting sites; reducing the early voting period for elections with state or federal races; removing timetables with respect to early voting in special elections; removing restrictions with respect to daily hours of operation of early voting sites; authorizing a supervisor of elections to provide early voting for elections not held in conjunction with a state or federal election; amending s. 101.68, F.S.; extending the time for canvassing and processing absentee ballots to 15 days before the election; amending s. 101.6923, F.S.; revising the form of the special absent(le ballot instructions for certain first-time voters; stating that an absentee ballot is considered illegal if the signature on the voter's certificate does not match the signature on record; providing instructions
4 CODING: Words stfteken are deletions; words~ are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 45 PageID 229

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

for updating a signature on a voter registration application; amending s. 101.75, F.S.; deleting a requirement for the dates of the qualifYing period for certain municipal elections to run for no less than 14 days; amending s. 102.141, F.S.; requiring the canvassing board to report all early voting and all tabulated absentee results to the department by a time certain; requiring periodic updates; amending s. 102.168, F.S.; revising provisions specifYing indispensable parties in a contest of an election; providing that in an election contest involving the review of a signature on an absentee ballot by a canvassing board, a circuit court may not review or consider evidence other than the signature on the voter's certificate and the elector's signatures in the registration records; providing for the reversal of the determination by the canvassing board if the court determines that the board abused its discretion; amending s. 103.021, F.S.; revising a definition; creating s. 103.095, F.S.; providing a procedure for the registration of a minor political party; requiring the Division of Elections to adopt rules to prescribe the manner in which political parties may have their filings cancelled; amending s. 103.101, F.S.; creating a Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee; providing membership; requiring for the committee to meet by a date certain and to set a date for the presidential preference primary; modifying timing requirements with respect to the number and selection ofdelegates for presidential preference primary candidates; deleting certain requirements governing party rules involving such delegates; amending s. 103.141, F.S.; revising procedures for the removal of an officer, .county committeeman, county committeewoman, precinct committeeman, precinct committeewoman, or member of a county executive committee; repealing s. 103.161, F.S., which relates to the removal or suspension of officers or members of a state or county executive committee; amending s. 104.29, F.S.; revising provisions
authorizing persons to view whether ballots are being correctly reconciled; amending s. 105.031, F .S.; revising the oath for candidates for judicial office; amending s. 106.011, F.S.; revising the definitions of the terms "contribution," "independent expenditure," "unopposed candidate," and "candidate"; conforming a cross-reference to changes made by the act; amending s. 106.021, F.S.; deleting requirements to report the address of certain persons receiving a reimbursement by a check drawn on a campaign account; amending s.. 106.022, F.S.; requiring a political committee, committee of continuous existence, or electioneering communications organization to file a statement of appointment with the filing officer rather than with the Division of Elections; authorizing an entity to change its appointment of registered agent or registered office by filing a written statement with the filing officer; requiring a registered agent who resigns to execute a written statement of resignation and file it with the filing officer; amending s. 106.023, F.S.; revising the form of the statement of candidate to require a candidate to acknowledge that he or she has been provided access to and understands the requirements of ch. 106, F.S.; amending s. 106.025, F.S.; exempting tickets or advertising for a campaign fundraiser from requirements of s. 106.143, F.S.; amending s. 106.03, F.S.; revising requirements for groups making expenditures for electioneering communications to file a statement of organization; amending s. 106.04,
5 CODING: Words striekeR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

F.S.; transferring a requirement that certain committees of continuous existence file campaign finance reports in special elections; subjecting a committee of continuous existence that fails to file a report or to timely file a report with the Division ofElections or a county or municipal filing officer to a fine; requiring a committee of continuous existence to include transaction information from credit card purchases in a report filed with the Division of Elections; requiring a committee of continuous existence to report changes in information previously reported to the Division of Elections within 10 days after the change; requiring the Division of Elections to revoke the certification of a committee of continuous existence that fails to file or report eertain information; requiring the division to adopt rules to prescribe the manner in which the certification is revoked; increasing the amount of a fine to be levied on a committee of continuous existence that fails to timely file certain reports; providing for the deposit of the proceeds ofthe fines; including the registered agent of a committee of continuous existence as a person whom the filing officer may notify that a report has not been filed; providing criteria for deeming delivery complete of a notice of fine; requiring a committee of continuous existence that appeals a fine to provide a copy of the appeal with the filing officer; amending s. 106.07, F.S.; creating an exception for reports due in the third calendar quarter immediately preceding a general election from a requirement that the campaign treasurer report contributions received and expenditures made on the lOth day following the end of each calendar quarter; revising reporting requirements for a statewide candidate who receives funding under the Florida Election Campaign Financing Act and candidates in a race with a candidate who has requested funding under that act; deleting a requirement for a committee of continuous existence to file a campaign treasurer's report relating to contributions or expenditures to influence the results ofa special election; revising the methods by which a campaign treasurer may be notified of the determination that a report is incomplete to include certified mail and other methods using a common carrier that provides proof of delivery of the notice; extending the time the campaign treasurer has to file an addendum to the report after receipt of notice of why the report is incomplete; providing criteria for deeming delivery complete of a notice of incomplete report; deleting a provision allowing for notification by telephone of an incomplete report; revising the information that must be included in a report to include transaction information for credit card purchases; deleting a requirement for a campaign depository to return checks drawn on the account to the campaign treasurer; specifying the amount of a fine for the failure to timely file reports after a special primary election or special election; specifYing that the registered agent of a political committee is a person whom a filing officer may notify of the amount of the fine for filing a late report; providing criteria for deeming delivery complete of a notice of late report and resulting fine; amending s. 106.0703, F.S.; deleting a requirement that an electioneering communications organization file electronically file certain periodic reports with the Department of State; amending s. 106.0705, F.S.; requiring certain individuals to electronically file certain reports with the Division of Elections; conforming a cross-
6 CODING: Words stAeken Bre deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 45 PageID 230

Ch.2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

reference to changes made by the act; deleting an obsolete provision; amending s. 106.08, F.S.; deleting a requirement for the Department of State to notify candidates as to whether an independent or minor party candidate has obtained the required number of petition signatures; deleting a requirement for certain unopposed candidates to return contributions; specifying the entities with which a political party's state executive committee and county executive committees and affiliated party committees must file a written acceptance of an in-kind contribution; amending s. 106.09, F.S.; specifying that the limitations on contributions by cash or cashier's check apply to the aggregate amount ofcontributions to a candidate or committee per election; amending s. 106.11, F.S.; revising the statement that must be contained on checks from a campaign account; deleting requirements relating to the use of debit cards; authorizing a campaign for a candidate to reimburse the candidate's loan to the campaign when the campaign account has sufficient funds; amending s. 106.141, F.S.; deleting a limit on the amount of surplus funds that a candidate may give to his or her political party; requiring candidates receiving public financing to return all surplus funds to the General Revenue Fund after paying certain monetary obligations and expenses; amending s. 106.143, F.S.; specifying disclosure statements that must be included in political advertisements paid for by a write-in candidate; revising the disclosure statements that must be included in certain political advertisements; clarifying the type of political advertisements that must be approved in advance by a candidate; deleting an exemption from the requirement to obtain a candidate's approval for messages designed to be worn; authorizing a disclaimer for paid political advertisements to contain certain registered names and abbreviations; amending s. 106.1437, F.S.; providing that expenditures for a miscellaneous advertisement are not considered to be a contribution to or on behalf of a candidate and do not constitute an independent expenditure; amending s. 106.17, F.S.; providing that the cost of certain polls are not contributions to a candidate; amending s. 106.19, F.S.; providing that a candidate's failure to comply with ch. 106, F.S., has no effect on whether the candidate has qualified for office; amending s. 106.25, F.S.; authorizing a person who is the subject of a complaint filed with the Florida Elections Commission to file a response before the executive director ofthe commission determines whether the complaint is legally sufficient; prohibiting the commission from determining by rule what constitutes willfulness or defining the term "willful"; authorizing the commission to enter into consent orders without requiring the respondent to admit to a violation of law; authorizing an administrative law judge to impose civil penalties for violations of ch. 104 or ch. 106, F.S.; amending s. 106.26, F.S.; requiring the commission to enforce certain witness subpoenas in the circuit court where the witness resides; amending s. 106.265, F.S.; authorizing an administrative law judge to assess civil penalties upon a finding of a violation of the election code or campaign financing laws; providing for civil penalties to be assessed against an electioneering communications organization; removing reference to the expired Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; directing that moneys from penalties and fines be deposited into the
7 CODING: Words stfiekeft sre deletions; words ~ sre addigons.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

General Revenue Fund; amending s. 106.29, F.S.; creating an exemption from state reporting requirements for certain contributions and expenditures by political parties; requiring state and county executive committees and affiliated party committees that make contributions or expenditures to influence the results of a special election or special primary election to file campaign treasurer's reports; amending campaign finance reporting dates, to conform; deleting a requirement that each state executive committee file the original and one copy of its reports with the Division of Elections; revising the due date for filing a report; providing criteria for deeming delivery complete of a notice of fine; amending s. 106.35, F.S.; deleting a requirement that the Division ofElection adopt rules relating to the format and filing of certain printed campaign treasurer's reports; amending s. 112.312, F.S.; excluding contributions or expenditures reported pursuant to federal election law from the definition of the term "gift"; amending s. 112.3215, F .S.; excluding contributions or expenditures reported pursuant to federal election law from the definition of the term "expenditure"; amending s. 876.05, F.S.; deleting a requirement for all candidates for public office to record an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida; repealing s. 876.07, F.S., relating to a requirement that a person make an oath to support the Constitution ofthe United States and of the State of Florida in order to be qualified as a candidate for office; providing for severability of the act; providing effective dates.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1. Subsection (16) is added to section 97.012, Florida Statutes, to read:
97.012 Secretary of State as chief election officer.-The Secretary of State is the chief election officer ofthe state, and it is his or her responsibility to:
(16) Provide written direction and opinions to the supervisors ofelections on the performance oftheir official duties with respect to the Florida Election Code or rules adopted by the Department of State.
Section 2. Subsection (18) ofsection 97.021, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.021 Definitions.-For the purposes of this code, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise, the term:
(18) "Minor political party" is any group as~ deiffietl in~ this stibseetioB which on January 1 preceding a primary election does not have registered as members 5 percent of the total registered electors of the state.•\By gpeupofeiti•ens aFgaai•ed faF the geBel'lll pliFjlases ofeleetiBg ta oltiee 'l"alified peFSOBS ftftd determiffiftg publie iasues rmlleF the demoemtie p•oeesses of the Umted States mftj beeome a miBBF palitieal paFtj af this state bj filiBg ·., ith the departmeBt a eeFtifieate she•• iag the name of the
8 CODING: Words stfiekeft sre deletions; words~ sre additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 45 PageID 231

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

ergallizatien, the names ef i~s eurren~ effieers, inelading the members ef its enee~tive eemmittee, and a eapy afits eanstitatien ar bylaws. It shall be the daty af the rllinar pelitieal party te netify the department ef any ehaages in
the filing certificate within a days ef saeh ehaages.
Section 3. Section 97.025, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.025 Election Code; copies thereof.-A pamphlet of a reprint of the Election Code, adequately indexed, shall be prepared by the Department of
State. Th<q>antr>hleL shall ~ made available 11r ahall; hEl'lfHHlHffiei:eflt
nambel' e~thesei'amPhlcts printed SB that ane may be-gi teft, '1ijl9&i'e<j1i· st, to each candidate who qualifies with the department. The pamphlet shall be made available A. suftieient n11mber ma) be sent to each supervisor, prior to the first day of qualifYing, so that fer distribatien, apen re'l~est, te each candidate who qualifies with the supervisor and te each clerk of elections have access to the pamphlet. The cost of lili!king priatiag the pamphlets available shall be paid out of funds appropriated for conducting elections.
Section 4. Section 97.0575, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.0575 Thil'd-party voter registrations.-
(1) Before engaging in any voter registration activities a third-party voter registration organization must register and provide to the division in an electronic format, the following information:
(a) The names of the officers of the organization and the name and . permanent address of the organization.
(bl The name and address of the orgaruzation's registered agent in the state.
(c) The names permanent addresses and temporary addresses. if any. of each registration agent registering persons to vote in this state on behalf of the organization.
(d) A sworn statement from each registration agent employed by or volunteering for the organization stating that the agent will obey all state laws and rules regarding the registration ofvoters. Such statement must be on a form containing notice of applicable penalties for false registration.
(2) The division or the supervisor of elections shall make voter registration forms available to third-party voter registration orgaruzations. All such forms must contain information identifving the organization to which the forms are provided. The division shall maintain a database of all third·party voter registration organizations and the voter registration forms assigned to the third·party voter registration organization. Each supervisor of elections shall provide to the division information on voter registration forms assigned to and received from third·party voter registration organizations. The information must be provided in a format and at times as required by the
9 CODING: Words e-trieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

division by rule. The division must update information on third-party voter registrations daily and make the information publicly available.
(1) Prier te engaging in any vetcr registratieft activities, a third party vater registration ergaaizatien shall name a registered agent in the state aad sabmit te the division, in a fel'm adapted by the division, the ftamc ef the registered agent and the name efthese indi iidaals respaasible fer the day ta day-epcratian efthc third party-vatcr-registrlltian-ergani...tian, inclading, if applicable, the names ef the entity's beard ef direeters, president, vice president, managiag pa•tneF, BF s~eh ethe• indi .id~als eagaged in simiiM daties a• functions. On er befe•e the lath day afte• the end ef eaeh calendar 'fH6FtCF, eaeh third party •:ate• Fegistratian arglffiizatian shall sHbmit ta the division a repart p•a tiding the date and laeatian af lffiY argalli•ed vater registFatian drives eend~eted by the argaaizatian in the prier calendar
~
(2) The failHFe te submit the infel'matien re~ired ~ subsection (1) daes net subject the thi•d party veter registmtian ••galli•atian te any civil •• criminal penalties fer sueh failure, and the failure ta subrllit sueh inferma tian is aat a basis fer denying sueh third party ·, ater registmtiea eFgaai•a tien with eepies ef\ ate• registration application ml'ffis.
(3Xl!.) A third-party voter registration organization that collects voter registration applications serves as a fiduciary to the applicant, ensuring that any voter registration application entrusted to the thi•d paFey , eter Fegist:mtiea organization, irrespective of party affiliation, race, ethnicity, or gender, shall be promptly delivered to the division or the supervisor of elections within 48 hours after the applicant completes it or the next business day if the appropriate office is closed for that 48-hour period. If a voter registration application collected by any third-party voter registration organization is not promptly delivered to the division or supervisor of elections, the third-party voter registration organization ~ shaJl..be liable for the following fines:
LW A fine in the amount of $50 for each application received by the division or the supervisor of elections more than 48 hours W4ays after the applicant delivered the completed voter registration application to the third-
party voter registration organization or any person, entity, or agent acting on its behalfor the next business day if the office is closed. A fine in the amount of $250 for each application received if the third-party vill&!: registration organization or person, entity, or agency acting on its behalf acted willfully.
2.,fb) A fine in the amount of$100 for each application collected by a third· party voter registration organization or any person, entity, or agent acting on its behalf, before priar-te book closing for any given election for federal or state office and received by the division or the supervisor ofelections after the book·closing beak elesing deadline for such election. A fine in the amount of $500 for each application received ifthe third-party registration organization or person, entity, or agency acting on its behalf acted willfully.
10 CODING: Words strieften are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 45 PageID 232

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

.i,l\e) A fine in the amount of$500 for each application collected by a thirdparty voter registration organization or any person, entity, or agent acting on its behalf, which is not submitted to the division or supervisor of elections. A fine in the amount of $1,000 for any application not submitted if the thirdparty Yl!k!: registration organization or person, entity, or agency acting on its behalf acted willfully.
The aggregate fine pursuant to this paragraph sHbseetiaR which may be assessed against a third-party voter registration organization, including affiliate organizations, for violations committed in a calendar year ill shall-be $1,000.
(b) A showinc: by the !iRes pre .;.<led in this slibseetien shall be red t~eed ey
three felirths iR eases in "hieh the third-party voter registration organization that the failure to deliver the voter rel:istration application within the required timeframe is based upon force maieure or impossibility of performance shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of this subsection has eemplied olith s"bseetiea (1). The secretary JlliiY ehall waive the fines described in this subsection upon a showing that the failure to deliver the voter registration application promptly is based upon force majeure or impossibility of performance.
(4) If the Secretary of State reasonably believes that a person has committed a violation of this section the secretarv may refer the matter to the Attorney General for enforcement. The Attorney General may institute a civil action for a yiolation of this section or to prevent a violation of this section An action for relief may include a permanent or temporary injunction a restraining order or any other approoriate order
~ The division shall adopt by rule a form to elicit specific information concerning the facts and circumstances from a person who claims to have been registered l&...vl!te by a third-party voter registration organization but who does not appear as an active voter on the voter registration rolls. The division shall also adopt rules to ensure the integrity of the registration process induding rules requiring third-party voter registration organizations to account for all state and federal registration forms used by their registration aaents Such rules may require an organization to proyide organization and form specific identification information on each form as determined by the department as needed to assist in the accountin~ of state and federal registration forms.
{b) The division may in•1estignte any violation of this seetien. Civil lines shall*"ssessed~e-divisiefrand enfereed tbroHgh-aey apprapriat&legal preeeedings.
fiDW The date on which an applicant signs a voter registration
application is presumed to be the date on which the third-party voter registration organization received or collected the voter registration application.
11 CODING: Words &trieJreB are deletions; words~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(7) The requirements of this section are retroactive for any third-party voter registration organization rel:istered with the department on the effective date of this act, and must be complied with within 90 days after the department provides notice to the third-party voter registration organization of the requirements contained in this section. Failure of the third-party voter registration omanjzation to comply with the requirements within 90 days after receipt of the notice shall automatically result in the cancellation of the third-party voter registration or@nization's registration

(6) The eivil lines pra•1ided in this seetian are in addition ta aey applieable erimiaal penalties.
{7) Fines ealleeted pHF!Hiaat te this seetian shall be annHally appro
priated ey the LegislatHre ts the department fer eafereemeat ef this seetiea
and fer •eter edHeatien. (8) The division may adapt rules ta administer this seetian. Section 5. Section 97.071, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 97.071 Voter information card.(1) A voter information card shall be furnished by the supervisor to all
registered voters residing in the supervisor's county. The card must contain: (a) Voter's registration number. (b) Date of registration. (c) Full name. (d) Party affiliation. (e) Date of birth. (0 Address oflegal residence. (g) Precinct number.
(h) Polling place address.
ill(hl Narne of supervisor and contact information of supervisor.
!iJ(i.) Other information deemed necessary by the supervisor.

(2) A voter may receive a replacement voter information card by providing a signed, written request for a replacement card to a voter registration official. Upon verification of registration, the supervisor shall issue the voter a duplicate card without charge.
12 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 45 PageID 233

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(3) In the case of a change of name, address of legal residence, polling place address or party affiliation, the supervisor shall issue the voter a new voter information card.
Section 6. The supervisor must meet the requirements of section 5 ofthis act for any elector who registers to vote or who is issued a new voter information card pursuant to s. 97.071<21 or (3) Florida Statutes on or after Au~st 1 2012
Section 7. Subse~tion (1) of section 97.073, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
97.073 Disposition of voter registration applications; cancellation notice.
(1) The supervisor must notify each applicant of the disposition of the applicant's voter registration application within 5 business days after voter registration information is entered into the statewide voter registration system. The notice must inform the applicant that the application has been approved, is incomplete, has been denied, or is a duplicate of a current registration. A voter information card sent to an applicant constitutes notice of approval of registration. If the application is incomplete, the supervisor must request that the applicant supply the missing information using a voter registration application sigoed by the applicant. A notice of denial must inform the applicant of the reason the application was denied.
Section 8. Subsections (1) and (2) ofsection 97.1031, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
97.1031 Notice ofchange ofresidence, change of name, or change ofparty affiliation.-
(1)W When an elector changes his or her residence address the elector must notify the supervisor of elections. Except as provided in paragraph (b) an address change must be submitted using a voter registration application.
(b) If the address change is within the state and notice is provided to the supervisor of elections of the county where the elector has moved the elector may do so by:
1. Contacting the suoervisor of elections via telephone or electronic means in which case the elector must provide his or h~.ulate~ofl>lrtb.;.J!!:
2 Submitting the chang-e on a voter registration appJication or other signed written notice. meves Hem the address named en that person's vater regist•atiea Feeerll te aaether allll•ess ·, ithia the same ee.,Blry, the eleeter mast "'"'ide netili.eatiea efs"eh me\e to the sal'eFViser efeleetiens sf that eeanty. The eleeter may I'Foville the B"''erviser a signed, written aetiee er may notify the ""l'erviser by telel'hene er eleetrenie means. Hewever, notili.eatiea of s"eh meve ether thaa bj signed, ·,ritteR aetiee mast inelalle the eleeter's date sf birth. 1\n eleete• maj alse !'FO.ide netili.eatien te ether , eter registratien elfieials as "'".idea in s"bseetiea (2). f, , eter infermatien
13 CODING: Words strielteH are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

earll relleetiag the aew iafermatiaa shall be iss.,ell ta the eleetar"" I'FBvillell ia s..BseetiaB (3).

(2) When an elector maves fram the address Hamed BB that l'ersea's voter registratiOB reeOFG to GBetheF address Ht a aift'eFeat eBimty b..t withffi the state, the eleeter seeks to change party affiliation, or the aame ofaa eleeter is ehiHlgea by maffiage OF ether legal !'FOeess, the eJector shall notifY his or her
supervjsor of elections or other flFB\ide natiee ef saeh change te a voter registration official by using a , eter registratiea al'l'lieatieB sigoed written notice that contains the elector's date ofbirth or voter registration number by the eleeter. Wben an elector changes his or her name by marriage or other legal process the elector shall notifY his or her supervisor ofelections or other voter registration official by using a signed written notice that contains the elector's date ofbirth or voter's registration number. A-;eter infermatieB eaFII relleetiag the ae" iafermatiea shall be iss.,ell to the eleeter as "'".illell iB s"bseetiea (3).

Section 9. Subsections (3) and (6) of section 98.075, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:

98.075 Registration records maintenance activities; ineligibility deter· minations.-

(3) DECEASED PERSONS.-

lliJl, The department shall identify those registered voters who are deceased by comparing information ea the lists of lleeeasell l'ersoas received from either:

lh The Department of Health as provided in s. 98.093;...QI.

b. The United States Social Securitv Administration including but not

limited to any master death file or index compiled by the United States

Social Security Administration.

·

2. Within 7 days after lJf'8H receipt of such information through the
statewide voter registration system, the supervisor shall remove the name of the registered voter.

(b) The supervisor shall remove the name of a deceased registered voter from the statewide voter registration system uoon receipt ofa copy of a death certificate issued by a governmental agency authorized to issue death certificates

(6) OTHER BASES FOR INELIGIBILITY.-Ifthe department or supervisor receives information ether thaa from the sources other than those identified in subsections (2)-(5) that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she is deceased adjudicated a convicted felon without having had his or her civil rights restored. adjudicated mentally incapacitated without having had his or her voting rights restored does not meet the age requirement pursuant to s. 97.041, is not a United States citizen, is a fictitious person, or
14 CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 45 PageID 234

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

has listed a residence that is not his or her legal residence, the supervisor !!ll!lU shall adhere to the procedures set forth in subsection (7) prior to the removal of a registered voter's name from the statewide voter registration system.
Section 10. Section 98.093, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
98.093 Duty ofofficials to furnish information relating to list.oH!fdeceased persons, persons adjudicated mentally incapacitated, and persons convicted of a felony.-
(1) In order to identifY ineligible registered voters and maintain eHffiH'e the mainteBaBee ef accurate and current voter registration records in the statewide voter registration system pursuant to procedures ins. 98.065 or s.
rul..l!1li, it is necessary for the department and supervisors of elections to
receive ~ certain information from state and federal officials and entities in the format prescribed. The deparimeBt aBd Slijlei'¥iSei'B ef eleetieBs shall Hse the iBfeFmatieft pFevided fFem the eeurees iB SHaeeetieB (2) te maiBtaiB the ;ate• Fegistmtieft FeeeFds.
(2) To the maximum extent feasible, state and local government agencies shall facilitate provision ofinformation and access to data to the department, including, but not limited to, databases that contain reliable criminal records and records of deceased persons. State and local government agencies that provide such data shall do so without charge if the direct cost incurred by those agencies is not significant.
(a) The Department of Health shall furnish monthly to the department a list containing the name, address, date of birth, date ofdeath, social security number, race, and sex of each deceased person 17 years of age or older.
(b) Each clerk ofthe circuit court shall furnish monthly to the department a list of those persons who have been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting during the preceding calendar month, a list of those persons whose mental capacity with respect to voting has been restored during the preceding calendar month, and a list of those persons who have returned signed jury notices during the preceding months to the clerk of the circuit court indicating a change ofaddress. Each list shall include the name, address, date of birth, race, sex, and, whichever is available, the Florida driver's license number, Florida identification card number, or social security number of each such person.
(c) Upon receipt of information from the United States Attorney, listing persons convicted of a felony in federal court, the department shall use such information to identify registered voters or applicants for voter registration who may be potentially ineligible based on information provided in accordance with s. 98.075.
(d) The Department ofLaw Enforcement shall identify those persons who have been convicted of a felony who appear in the voter registration records
15 CODING: Words stFiekefl are deletions; words ~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

supplied by the statewide voter registration system, in a time and manner that enables the department to meet its obligations under state and federal law.
(e) The Florida Parole Commission Be&Fd ef ElleeHti•e ClemeBe) shall furnish at least bimonthly lftllfttftly to the department data including the .ilkntity a-list of those persons granted clemency in the preceding month or any updates to prior records which have occurred in the preceding month. The .datl! Hat shall contain the commission's Beam ef Eueeutive ClemeBey case number and the person's, name, address, date ofbirth, race, gender sex:, Florida driyeis license number FJorida identification card number or the last four di,Pts of the social security number, if available, and references to record identifiers assigned by the Department of Corrections ~ Department of Law Enforcement, a unique identifier of each clemency case, and the effective date of clemency of each person.
(f) The Department of Corrections shall identify those persons who have been convicted of a felony and committed to jts custody or placed on community supervision The information must be provided to the department at a time and in manner that enables the department to identifY
registered voters who are convicted felons and to meet its obligations under
state and federal Jaw. furnish meBthly te the dep&FtmeBt a list ef these pe•seBs tFaBsreFFed te the DepBFtmeBt ef CeFFeetiens iB the preeediBg "'""th er any Hpdates te prieF FeeeFds whish luwe eeeHned in the preceding month. Tfte list shall eefttaia tfte name, adtlPess, date ef birth, raee, sex, seeial seeurity-caumbe.,Depa.tment ef CeFFeetiens reeerd identifieatien-nHmbeF, tlftd asseeiated DeJJftl'tmeBt ef Law EHfureemeat feleft;) eeH: .9:etieH: :reeerd Hlimbef' ef eaeh pef'SeH:.
(g) The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall furnish monthly to the department a list of those persons whose names have been removed from the driver's license database because they have been licensed in another state. The list shall contain the name, address, date of birth, sex, social security number, and driver's license number of each such person.
(3) Nothing in This section does not shall limit or restrict the supervisor in his or her duty to remove the names of persons from the statewide voter registration system pursuant to s. 98.075(7) based upon information received from other sources.
Section 11. Effective July 1, 2012, subsections (1) and (2) of section 98.0981, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
98.0981 Reports; voting history; statewide voter registration system information; precinct-level election results; book closing statistics.-
(1) VOTING HISTORY AND STATEWIDE VOTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM INFORMATION.-
16 CODING: Words stPielteft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 45 PageID 235

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

(a) Within 1Q 49 days after certification by the Elections Canvassing Commission of a presidential preference primary special election primary election or a general election, supervisors of elections shall transmit to the department, in a uniform electronic format specified in paragraph (d) by-the department, completely updated voting history information for each quali· fied voter who voted.
(b) After receipt ofthe information in paragraph (a), the department shall prepare a report in electronic format which contains the following information, separately compiled for the primary and general election for all voters qualified to vote in either election:
1. The unique identifier assigned to each qualified voter within the statewide voter registration system;
2. All information provided by each qualified voter on his or her voter registration application pursuant to s. 97.052(2), except that which is confidential or exempt from public records requirements;
3. Each qualified voter's date of registration;
4. Each qualified voter's current state representative district, state senatorial district, and congressional district, assigned by the supervisor of elections;
5. Each qualified voter's current precinct; and
6. Voting history as transmitted under paragraph (a) to include whether the qualified voter voted at a precinct location, voted during the early voting period, voted by absentee ballot, attempted to vote by absentee ballot that was not counted, attempted to vote by provisional ballot that was not counted, or did not vote.
(c) Within o!li 6ll days after certification by the Elections Canvassing
Commission of uresidential preference .P-rimary special electiOil._-P-riiDar]: election or a general election, the department shall send to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Senate Minority Leader, and the House Minority Leader a report in electronic format that includes all information set forth in paragraph (b).
(d) File specifications are as follows:
1. The file shall contain records designated by the categories below for all qualified voters who regardless of the voter's county of residence or active or jnactiye registration status at the book closing for the corresoonding election that the file is being created for:
a. Voted a regular ballot at a precinct location.
b. Voted at a precinct location using a provisional ballot that was subsequently counted.
17 CODING: Words -strielren are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

c. Voted a regular ballot during the early voting period.
d. Voted during the early voting period using a provisional ballot that was subsequently counted.
e. Voted by abaentee ballot.
f. Attempted to vote by absentee ballot but the ballot was not counted.
g Attempted to vote by provisional ballot but the ballot was not counted in that election.
2. Each file shall be created or converted into a tab-delimited format.
3. File names shall adhere to the following convention:
a Three-character countv identifier as established by the department followed by an underscore.
b Followed by four-character file type identifier of'VH03' followed by an underscore.
c. Followed by FVRS election ID followed by an underscore.
d. Followed by Date Created followed by an underscore.
e. Date format is YYYYMMDD
f, Followed by Time Created - HHMMSS.
g. Followed by ".txt".
4. Each record shall contain the following columns: Record Identifier EVRS_Y!!tm:.n:!t'!l!!!ll>!lr._E...\'R.S_Eie<;tion ID Num_b.ru:..YQt\!_Q!!J;e. )'Q.te_H~_tQ_ry Code Precinct Convressional District Honse District Senate District County Commission District, and School Board District.
(e) Each supervisor of elections shall reconcile before submission the aggregate total of ballots cast in each precinct as reported in the precinctlevel election results to the aggregate total number of voters with voter history for the election for each district.
<D Each supervisor of elections shall submit the results of the data
reconciliation as described in paragraph (e) to the department in an electronic format and give a written explanation for any precincts where the reconciliation as described in paragraph (e) results in a discrepancy between the voter history and the election results.
(2Xl!.) PRECINCT-LEVEL ELECTION RESULTS.-Within 1Q 49 days after certification by the Elections Canvassing Commission the-date of a presidential preference primary election, a special election, primary election or a general election, the supervisors of elections shall collect and submit to
18 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 45 PageID 236

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

the department precinct-level election results for the election in a uniform electronic format specified by para!Ul!ph {c) the department. The precinctlevel election results shall be compiled separately for the primary or special primary election that preceded the general or special general election, respectively. The results shall specifically include for each precinct the aggregate total of all ballots cast for each candidate or nominee to fill a national, state, county, or district office or proposed constitutional amendment with subtotals for each candidate and ballot cype unless fewer than 10 voters voted a ballot type. "All ballots cast" means ballots cast by voters who cast a ballot whether at a precinct location, by absentee ballot including overseas absentee ballots, during the early voting period, or by provisional ballot.
(b) The department shall make such information available on a searchable sortable and downloadable database via its website that also includes the file layout and codes. The database shall be searchable and sortable by countv precinct and candidate The database shall he downloadable in a tabdelimited furmat The database shall be available for download county-bycountv and also as a statewide file. Such report shall also be made avl!i!abl!l upon request
{c) The files containing the precinct-level election results shall be created in accordance with the applicable file specification·
1 The precinct-]eyel results file shall be created or converted into a tabdelimited text file
2. The row immediately before the first data record shall contain the column names of the data elements that make up the data records There shall be one header record followed by multiple data records
3 The data records shall include the following columns· County Name Election Number Election Date Unique Precinct Identifier Precinct Polling Location Total Remered Voters Total Registered Republicans Total Registered Democrats Total Registered All Other Parties Contest Name Candidate/Retention/Issue Name Candidate Florida Voter Registration System ID Number Division of Elections Unique Candidate Identifying Number Candidate Party District Undervote Total Overvote Total Writein Total. and Vote Total.
Section 12. Subsections (5) and (7) ofsection 99.012, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
99.012 Restrictions on individuals qualifYing for public office.-
(5) If an order of a court that has become final determines that a person did not comply with this sectjon the person shall not be gualified as a candidate fur election and his or her name may not appear on the ballot. 'l'lle name of aa;j peFBOB "he does a at eampey with this seetion ffili) be rema, ell
19 CODING: Words atPiekeB are deletions; words ~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

ffom every ballot oa wl>ieh it appeal'S waea o¥de¥ed by a eireffit eolll't "POB the petitioa of an eleetor or the Departmeat of State.
(7) Nothing contained in subsection (3) relates to persons holding any
federal office m: seeking the office of President or Vice President.
Section 13. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) of section 99.021, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection (3) is added to that section, to read:
99.021 Form of candidate oath.-
(l)(a)l. Each candidate, whether a party candidate, a candidate with no party affiliation, or a write-in candidate, in order to qualify for nomination or election to any office other than a judicial office as defined in chapter 105 or a federal office, shall take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation in writing. A pfiBted copy of the oath or affirmation shall be made available fumisBed to the candidate by the officer before whom such candidate seeks to qualify and shall be substantially in the following form:

State of Florida
County of......
Before me, an officer authorized to administer oaths, personally appeared ...(please print name as you wish it to appear on the ballot)..., to me well known, who, being sworn, says that he or she is a candidate for the office of ......;that he or she is a qualified elector of ...... County, Florida; that he or she is qualified under the Constitution and the laws ofFiorida to hold the office to which he or she desires to be nominated or elected; that he O¥ she has takes the oath Fefj.,iFed by ss. 876.95 876.19, Florida Stat..tes; that he or she has qualified for no other public office in the state, the term of which office or any part thereof runs concurrent with that ofthe office he or she seeks; aad that he or she has resigned from any office from which he or she is required to resign pursuant to s. 99.012, Florida Statutes· and that he or she wiii support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of .E:!m:idJI.
...(Signature of candidate).. .
...(Address).. .
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ...... day of ......, ...(year)... , at ...... County, Florida.
...(Signature and title of officer administering oath)...

2. Each candidate for federal office, whether a party candidate, a candidate with no party affiliation, or a write-in candidate, in order to qualify for nomination or election to office shall take and subscribe to an oath
20 CODING: Words striekefl are deletions; words .uru:krlin.ed are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 45 PageID 237

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

or affirmation in writing. A jH'ffited copy of the oath or affirmation shall be made available fumished to the candidate by the officer before whom such candidate seeks to qualify and shall be substantially in the following form:

State of Florida
County of ......
Before me, an officer authorized to administer oaths, personally appeared ...(please print name as you wish it to appear on the ballot)... , to me well known, who, being sworn, says that he or she is a candidate for the office of ......;that he or she is qualified under the Constitution and laws of the United States to hold the office to which he or she desires to be nominated or elected; BHII that he or she has·qualified for no other public office in the state, the term ofwhich office or any part thereof runs concurrent with that of the office he or she seeks; and that he or she will support the Constitution of the United States.
...(Signature of candidate)...
... (Address) ...

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ...... day of ......, ...(year)... , at ...... County, Florida.
... (Signature and title of officer administering oath)...

(b) In addition, any person seeking to qualify for nomination as a candidate of any political party shall, at the time of subscribing to the oath or affinnation, state in writing:
1. The party of which the person is a member.
2. That the person is nat a registered member sfaey ather l'alitieal !'arty and has not been a registered member of eandielate fep aeffl:inatieH: fer any other political party for 365 days before the beginning of qualifying faf--a jleria!l af Gmonths preceding the general election for which the person seeks to qualify.
3. That the person has paid the assessment levied against him or her, if any, as a candidate for said office by the executive committee of the party of which he or she is a member.
(3) This section does not apply to a person who seeks to qualify for election pursuant toss, 103 021 and 103.101.
Section 14. Subsections (5) and (7) of section 99.061, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection (11) is added to that section, to read:
21 CODING: Words &tRekeH are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

99.061 Method of qualifying for nomination or election to federal, state, county, or district office.-
(5) At the time of qualifying for office, each candidate for a constitutional office shall file a full and public disclosure offinancial interests pursuant to s. 8, Art. II of the State Constitution, which must be verified under oath or affirmation pursuant to s. 92.525(] )(a) and a candidate for any other office, including local elective office, shall file a statement of financial interests pursuant to s. 112.3145.
(7)(a) In order for a candidate to be qualified, the following items must be received by the filing officer by the end of the qualifying period:
1. A properly executed check drawn upon the candidate's campaign account payable to the oerson or entity as prescribed by the filing officer in an amount not less than the fee required by s. 99.092 unless the candidate obtained the required number ofsignatures on petitions ar, in JieiJ thereof, as ajljllieable, the eajly af the natiee af obtaining ballet jlasitian pursuant to s. 99.095. The filing fee for a special district candidate is not required to be drawn upon the candidate's campaign account. If a candidate's check is returned by the bank for any reason, the filing officer shall immediately notify the candidate and the candidate shall have until, the end ofqualifying Hat.. ithst..,.!ling, h1>'1e 48 hsiJFB fram the time s ~eh nati!ieatian is reeei, ell, eJ<e!IJ!Iing SatiJrlla) s, SIJH!II>) s, and legal hali!laya, to pay the fee with a cashier's check purchased from funds ofthe campaign account. Failure to pay the fee as provided in this subparagraph shall disqualify the candidate.
2. The candidate's oath required by s. 99.021, which must contain the name of the candidate as it is to appear on the ballot; the office sought, including the district or group number if applicable; and the signature of the candidate, which must be verified under oath or affirmation pursuant to s. 92.525(1)(a) !IIJI) aelma .. le!lge!l.
a. The loyalty aath re'IIJire!l by s. 87G.g8, signed by the eBft!li!late ....11
!IIJiy aelmawle!lge!l.
Q.,4. If the office sought is partisan, the written statement of political party affiliation required by s. 99.021(1)(b).
1.~ The completed form for the appointment of campaign treasurer and designation of campaign depository, as required by s. 106.021.
Q,6. The full and public disclosure or statement of financial interests required by subsection (5). A public officer who has filed the full and public disclosure or statement of financial interests with the Commission on Ethics or the supervisor of elections prior to qualifying for office may file a copy of that disclosure at the time of qualifying.
(b) If the filing officer receives qualifying papers during the qualifying period prescribed in this section which that do not include all items as required by paragraph (a) prior to the last day of qualifying, the filing officer
22 CODING: Words stflekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 45 PageID 238

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

shall make a reasonable effort to notify the candidate of the missing or incomplete items and shall inform the candidate that all required items must be received by the close ofqualifying. A candidate's name as it is to appear on the ballot may not be changed after the end of qualifying.
(c) The filing officer performs a ministerial function in reviewing qyalifyinll' papers In determininll' whether a candidate is qualified the filing officer shall review the qualifving papers to determine whether all items required by paragraph (a) have been properly filed and whether each item is complete on its face, including whether items that must be verified have been properly verified pursuant to s 92 525t1Xal The filin!l' officer may
not determine whether the contents of the qualifving papers are accurate
(11) The decision of the filing officer concerning whether a candidate is qualified is exempt from the provisions of chapter 120.
Section 15. Subsection (2) ofsection 99.063, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
99.063 Candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor.-
(2) No later than 5 p.m. of the 9th day following the primary election, each desigoated candidate for Lieutenant Governor shall file with the Department of State:
(a) The candidate's oath required by s. 99.021, which must contain the name of the candidate as it is to appear on the ballot; the office sought; and the sigoature of the candidate which nrnst be verified under oath or affirmation pursuant to s. 92.525(l)(a) daly aelm&'ivledged.
(b) The Is) alty sath reqniFed by s. 876.08, signed by the eandidate and dnl) aelme ,fledged.
(hl(e) If the office sought is partisan, the written statement of political party affiliation required by s. 99.021(l)(b).
(clfd) The full and public disclosure of financial interests pursuant to s. 8, Art. II of the State Constitution. A public officer who has filed the full and public disclosure with the Commission on Ethics prior to qualifying for office may file a copy of that disclosure at the time of qualifying.
Section 16. Subsection (1) of section 99.092, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
99.092 Qualifying fee of candidate; notification of Department of State.
(1) Each person seeking to qualify for nomination or election to any office, except a person seeking to qualify by the petition process pursuant to s. 99.095 and except a person seeking to qualify as a write-in candidate, shall pay a qualifying fee, which shall consist of a filing fee and election assessment, to the officer with whom the person qualifies, and any party
23
CODING: Words etflekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

assessment levied, and shall attach the original or sigoed duplicate· of the receipt for his or her party assessment or pay the same, in accordance with the provisions of s. 103.121, at the time of filing his or her other qualifying papers. The amount of the filing fee is 3 percent of the annual salary of the office. The amount of the election assessment is 1 percent of the annual salary of the office sought. The election assessment shall be deposited inte the Clearing Funds Trust FWld and transferred to the Elections Commission Trust Fund .. ithin the Department efLegall'..ffail'S. The amount ofthe party assessment is 2 percent of the annual salary. The annual salary of the office for purposes of computing the filing fee, election assessment, and party assessment shall be computed by multiplying 12 times the monthly salary, excluding any special qualification pay, authorized for such office as ofJuly 1 immediately preceding the first day of qualifying. No qualifying fee shall be returned to the candidate unless the candidate withdraws his or her candidacy before the last date to qualify. If a candidate dies prior to an election and has not withdrawn his or her candidacy before the last date to qualify, the candidate's qualifying fee shall be returned to his or her desigoated beneficiary, and, if the filing fee or any portion thereof has been transferred to the political party ofthe candidate, the Secretary ofState shall direct the party to return that portion to the desigoated beneficiary of the candidate.
Section 17. Subsection (1) ofsection 99.093, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
99.093 Municipal candidates; election assessment.-
(!) Each person seeking to qualify for nomination or election to a municipal office shall pay, at the time of qualifying for office, an election assessment. The election assessment shall be an amount equal to 1 percent of the annual salary of the office sought. Within 30 days after the close of qualifying, the qualifying officer shall forward all assessments collected pursuant to this section to the florida Elll~tions Coi1!IDission De!>!ll'tmeat ef State for~ t•ansfe• te the Elections Commission Trust Fund within the De!>al'tment sf Legal Mail'S.
Section 18. Paragraph (d) is added to subsection (2) of section 99.095, Florida Statutes, to read:
99.095 Petition process in lieu of a qualifying fee and party assessment.
(2)
(d) In a year of apportionment. any candidate for county or district office seekinll' ballot position by the petition process may obtain the required number of signatures from any registered voter in the respective county regardless of district bol!lldaries. The candidate shall obtain at least the number of signatures equal to 1 percent of the total number of redstered voters as shown by a compilation by the department for the immediately
24 CODING: Words stflelren are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 45 PageID 239

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

preceding general election divided by the total number of districts of the office involved.
Section 19. Subsections (1), (3), and (5) of section 99.097, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection .(6) is added to that section, to read:
99.097 Verification of signatures on petitions.-
(l)ill) As determined by each supervisor, based upon local conditions, the checking of names on petitions may be based on the most inexpensive and administratively feasible of eitber of the following methods of verification:
l...W A name B) name, signatHre by signat..re check of each petition the nHmber ef aHtheri•ed signatares en the l'etitiens; or
~fbl A check of a random sample, as provided by the Department of State, of Hll1ftes aad signatHres en the petitions. The sample must be such that a determination can be made as to whether or not the required number of signatures hill; ha¥e been obtained with a reliability of at least 99.5 percent.
ilil Rules and guidelines for this-methed<!f petition verification shall be adopted l'•emHigated by the Department of State. Rules and guidelines for a random sample method of verification,...whleh may include a requirement that petitions bear an additional number of names and signatures, not to exceed 15 percent of the names and signatures otherwise required. If the petitions do not meet such criteria or if the petitions are prescribed b~ 1ill!J!l.l, thea the use of the random sample method of verification i§ methed deseribed in this !laFagral'h shall not be available to supervisors.
(3)(a) If all other requirements for the 'petition are met a signature on a petition shall be verified and counted as valid for a registered voter if after comparing the sirnature on the petition and the signature of the registered voter in the voter registration system the supervisor is able to determine that the petition signer is the same as the registered voter even if the name on the petition is not in substantially the same form as in the voter registration system. A name en a petitien, ,, hieh aame is net in substantially the same ferm as a name en the veter registratien beaks, shall be eeHnted as a Yalid signatHre if, alter eeml'aring the signature en the l'etitien '' ith the signatHre ef the alleged signer as shewn en the registratien beaks, the SH!lerviser determines that the l'ersen signing the l'etitien and the l'ersen "'vhe Fegiste:Fed te , ate Me eae and the same.
ili.) In any situation in which this code requires the form of the petition to be prescribed by the division, no signature shall be counted toward the number of signatures required unless it is on a petition form prescribed by the division.
(!:}!b) If a voter signs a petition and lists an address other than the legal residence where the voter is registered, the supervisor shall treat the signature as if the voter had listed the address where the voter is registered.
25 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(5) The results of a verification pursuant to subparagraph (1)(al2. paragraph (l)(b) may be contested in the circuit court by the candidate; an announced opponent; a representative of a designated political committee; or a person, party, or other organization submitting the petition. The contestant shall file a complaint, together with the fees prescribed in chapter 28, with the clerk of the circuit court in the county in which the petition is certified or in Leon County if the petition covers more than one county within 10 days after midnight ofthe date the petition is certified; and the complaint shall set forth the grounds on which the contestant intends to establish his or her right to require a complete check of the~ names ruul eignatares pursuant to subparagraph (l)(a)l. l'amgral'h (l)(a). In the event the court orders a complete check of the petition and the result is not changed as to the success or lack of success of the petitioner in obtaining the requisite number ofvalid signatures, then such candidate, unless the candidate has filed the oath stating that he or she is unable to pay such charges; announced opponent; representative of a designated politicai committee; or party, person, or organization submitting the petition, unless such person or organization has filed the oath stating inability to pay such charges, shall pay to the supervisor of elections of each affected county for the complete check an amount calculated at the rate of 10 cents for each additional signature checked or the actual cost of checking such additional signatures, whichever is less.
(6)(a) If any person is paid to solicit signatures on a petition, an undue burden oath may not subsequently be filed in lieu of payjm: the fee to have signatures verified for that petition,
(h) If an undue burden oath has been filed and payment js subsequently rua_de_t.Q.a_l}_y_p_m:son to solicit sirnatures on a petition the undue burden ofl..th is no longer valid and a fee for all signatures previously submitted to the supervisor ofelections and any that are submitted thereafter shall be paid by the candidate person or organization that submitted the undue burden oath. If contributions as defined in s. 106.011 are received any monetacy contributions must first be used to reimburse the suoervisor of elections for any signature verification fees that were not paid because of the filing of an undue burden oatb.
Section 20. Section 100.061, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
100.061 Primary election.-In each year in which a general election is held, a primary election for nomination of candidates ofpolitical parties shall be held on the Tuesday 1.!l lO weeks prior to the general election. The candidate receiving the highest number of votes cast in each contest in the primary election shall be declared nominated for such office. If two or more candidates receive an equal and highest number of votes for the same office, such candidates shall draw lots to determine which candidate is nominated.
Section 21. Section 100.101, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
26 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 45 PageID 240

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

100.101 Special elections and special primary elections. IS>£Ce!'t as !'F&Vided ia s. Hl9.111(2), A special election or special primary election shall be held in the following cases:
(1) If no person has been elected at a general election to fill an office which was required to be filled by election at such general election.
(2) Ifa vacancy occurs in the <>ffice ofstate senator or member ofthe state house of representatives.
(3) If it is necessary to elect presidential electors, by reason of the offices of President and Vice President both having become vacant.
(4) Ifa vacancy occurs in the office of member from Florida ofthe House of Representatives of Congress.
Section 22. Section 100.111, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
100.111 Filling vacancy.-
(1)(a) If any vacancy occurs in any office which is required to be filled pursuant to s. 1(0, Art. IV ofthe State Constitution and the remainder ofthe term of such office is 28 months or longer, then at the next general election a person shall be elected to fill the unexpired portion of such term, commencing on the first Tuesday after the first Monday following such general election.
(b) Ifsuch a vacancy occurs prior to the first day set by law for qualifying for election to office at such general election, any person seeking nomination or election to the unexpired portion of the term shall qualify within the time prescribed by law for qualifying for other offices to be filled by election at such general election.
(c) If such a vacancy occurs prior to the primary election but on or after the first day set by law for qualifying, the Secretary of State shall set dates for qualifying for the unexpired portion of the term ofsuch office. Any person seeking nomination or election to the unexpired portion of the term shall qualify within the time set by the Secretary of State. If time does not permit party nominations to be made in conjunction ·with the primary election, the Governor may call a special primary election to select party nominees for the unexpired portion of such term.
(:l)(a) If, ill any state BF CB-~ afHee Fe'l\lif'ed ta be ailed by eleetiaa, !l •aeaaey aee\H's during aa eleetiaa ) eRF by reasea af the iaewnbeat h!l';iag <jiialilied as a candidate fer federal ai'Hee !IIH'Buaat ta s. 99.961, ae S!'Ceial eleetiea is reqllired. Afiy !ICFSBH seekiag aamiaatiBH er eleetiaa te the ei'Hee sa vacated shall l!"alifYwithia the time !'feseribed by s. 99.961 fer <jlialityiag fer state er eellftty ai'Hees ta be lilled by eleetiea.
(b) If such a vaeaHey eeCIH'S ill !lH eleetiaa ) eRF ether thaa the aae immediately 11reeediag enpiratiea ef the 11reeeat term, the Secretary af State shall aetifY the SHpervise• efeleetieHS ia each eellftty seFVed by the ei'Hee that
27 CODING: Words 5tflekeH are deletions; words~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

a vaeaaey has beea created. s..ch aatiee shall be l'ra,·ided te the SH!Ie"' iser ef
eleetieHS net later th!lft the elese efthe fil'St day eet fer qHalif;j illg fer etate ar
eaHHty ef!iee. The SH!ICFViser shall!'rB';ide !l>iblie aetiee efthe ·;aeaaey ia RH)
maBBeF the SeeFetRF) ef State deems aJli'FB!Iriate.

f2lf31 Whenever there ie a vacancy for which a special election ie required pursuant to e. 100.101, the Governor, after consultation with the Secretary of State, shall fix the dates of a special primary election and a special election. Nominees of political parties shall be chosen under the primary !awe of thie
state in the special primary election to become candidates in the special election. Prior to setting the special election dates, the Governor shall consider any upcoming elections in the jurisdiction where the special election will be held. The dates fixed by the Governor shall be specific days certein and shall not be established by the happening of a condition or stated in the alternative. The dates fixed shall provide a minimum of 2 weeks between each election. In the event a vacancy occurs in the office of state senator or member of the House of Representatives when the Legislature is in regular legislative session, the minimum times prescribed by this subsection may be waived upon concurrence of the Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the President of the Senate. If a vacancy occurs in the office ofstate senator and no session ofthe Legislature is scheduled to be held prior to the next general election, the Governor may fix the dates for the special primary election and for the special election to coincide with the dates of the primary election and general election. If a vacancy in office occurs in any district in the state Senate or House of Representatives or in any congressional district, and no session of the Legislature, or session of Congress if the vacancy is in a congressional district, is scheduled to be held during the unexpired portion ofthe term, the Governor is not required to call a special election to fill such vacancy.

(a) The dates for candidates to qualify in such special election or special primary election shall be fixed by the Department of State, and candidates shall qualify not later than noon of the last day so fixed. The dates fixed for qualifying shall allow a minimum of 14 days between the last day of qualifying and the special primary election.

(b) The filing of campaign expense statements by candidates in such special elections or special primaries and by 'committees making contributions or expenditures to influence the results of such special primaries or special elections shall be not later than such dates as shall be fixed by the Department of State; and in fixing such dates the Department of State shall take into consideration and be governed by the practical time limitations.

(c) The dates for a candidate to qualify by the petition process pursuant to s. 99.095 in such special primary or special election shall be fixed by the Department ofState. In fixing such dates the Department of State shall take into consideration and be governed by the practical time limitations. Any candidate seeking to qualify by the petition. process in a special primary election shall obtain 25 percent of the signatures required by s. 99.095.
28 CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 45 PageID 241

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(d) The qualifYing fees and party assessments of such candidates as may qualify shall be the same as collected for the same office at the last previous primary for that office. The party assessment shall be paid to the appropriate executive committee of the political party to which the candidate belongs.
(e) Each county canvassing board shall make as speedy a return of the
result of such special primary elections and special elections a8 time will
permit, and the Elections Canvassing Commission likewise shall make as speedy a canvass and declaration of the nominees as time will permit.
illlf4l(a) In the event that death, resignation, withdrawal, m: removal,-<lf'
BR:) etheF ea~:~se BF e, ent should cause a party to have a vacancy in nomination which leaves no candidate for an office from such party, the tiline: officer before whom the candidate qualified DeJl!lFtment ef State shall notify the chair ofthe aJlJlreJlriate state and, distriet, ar county political party executive committee of such party; and;;
1. If the vacancy in nomination is for a statewide office the state party chair shall within 5 days, the ehair shall call a meeting ofhis or her executive board eemmittee to consider designation of a nominee to fill the vacancy.
2. If the vacancy in nomination is for the office of United States Representative. state senator. state representative. state attorney. or public defender the state party chair shall notifY the appropriate county chair or chairs and within 5 daya the appropriate county chair or chairs shall call a me.!lt.ing:ofthe members of the executive committee in the affected county or counties to consider designation of a nominee to fill the vacancy.
3. Ifthe vacancy in nomination is for a county office the state partv chair shall notify the appropriate county chair and within 5 days the appropriate county chair shall call a meeting ofhis or her executive committee to consider designation of a nominee to fill the vacang.
The name of any person so designated shall be submitted to the filing officer before whom the candidate qualified DeJlartment ef State within 7 days after notice to the chair in order that the person designated may have his or her name on the ballot of the ensuing general election. If the name of the new nominee is submitted after the certification of results of the preceding primary election, however, the ballots shall not be changed and the former party nominee's name will appear on the ballot. Any ballots cast for the former party nominee will be counted for the person designated by the political party to replace the former party nominee. If there is no opposition to the party nominee, the person designated by the political party to replace the former party nominee will be elected to office at the general election. Fill' JlUrpeses--<>1'-this-paragral'h,--the--tel'ffi--"distpet political- party·· executive eammittee" means the members ef tbe state elteeative eammittee sf a JlBiitieal Jla~ fFem tbese eeanties eemJlrising the area invei'ling a aistriet efliee..
29 CODING: Words sifleken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(b) When, under the circumstances set forth in the preceding paragraph, vacancies in nomination are required to be filled by committee nominations, such vacancies shall be filled by party rule. In any instance in which a nominee is selected by a committee to fill a vacancy in nomination, such nominee shall pay the same filing fee and take the same oath as the nominee would have taken had he or she regularly qualified for election to such office.
(c) Any person who, at the close of qualifYing as prescribed in ss. 99.061 and 105.031, was qualified for nomination or election to or retention in a public office to be filled at the ensuing general election or who attempted to qualifY and failed to qualify is prohibited from qualifYing as a candidate to fill a vacancy in nomination for any other office to be filled at that general election, even if such person has withdrawn or been eliminated as a candidate for the original office sought. However, this paragraph does not apply to a candidate for the office of Lieutenant Governor who applies to fill a vacancy in nomination for the office of Governor on the same ticket or to a person who has withdrawn or been eliminated as a candidate and who is subsequently designated as a candidate for Lieutenant Governor under s. 99.063.
(4) A vacancy in nomination is not created if an order of a court that has become final determines that a nominee did not properly qualify or did not meet the necessarv qualifications to hold the office for which he or she sought ~
(5) In the event ofunforeseeable circumstances not contemplated in these general election laws concerning the calling and holding of special primary elections and special elections resulting from court order or other unpredictable circumstances, the Department of State shall have the authority to provide for the conduct of orderly elections.
Section 23. Subsections (1), (3), (6), (7), and (8) of section 100.371, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
100.371 Initiatives; procedure for placement on ballot.-
(1) Constitutional amendments proposed by initiative shall be placed on the ballot for the general election, provided the initiative petition has been filed with the Secretary of State no later than February 1 of the year the general election is held. A petition shall be deemed to be filed with the Secretary of State upon the date the secretary determines that valid and verified petition forms have been signed by the constitutionally required number and distribution of electors under this code, sabjeet ta the right af re •aeatian established in tbis seetian.
(3) An initiative petition form circulated for signature may not be bundled with or attached to any other petition. Each signature shall be dated when made and shall be valid for a period of .24 years following such date, provided all other requirements of law are met. The sponsor shall submit signed and dated forms to the HJlJlFeJlriate supervisor of elections for
30 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 45 PageID 242

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

the county ofresidence listed by the nerson signing the form for verification l!f as-to the number of registere& eleetel'S nhese valid signatures ~
appeaF thereon. If a sirnature on a netition is from a re~stered voter in another countv the supervisor sball notifv the petition sponsor of the misfiled petition. The supervisor shall promptly verifY the signatures within
30 days l!!kr of receipt of the petition forms and payment of the fee required by s. 99.097. The supervisor shall promptly record, in the manner prescribed by the Secretary of State, the date each form is received by the supervisor, and the date the signature on the form is verified as valid. The supervisor may verifY that the signature on a form is valid only if:
(a) The form contains the original signature of the purported elector.
(b) The purported elector has accurately recorded on the form the date on which he or she signed the form.
(c) The form aeetH'Iltely sets forth the purported elector's name, street
address, rill'. county, and voter registration number or date of birth.
(d) The purported elector is, at the time he or she signa the form and at the time the form is verified, a duly qualified and registered elector eutheri•e& te 1ete in the ll1l!tll emmty in .,, hleh hls er b& signatare is
~.
The supervisor shall retain the signature forms for at least 1 year following the election in which the issue appeared on the ballot or until the Division of Elections notifies the supervisors of elections that the committee that whieh circulated the petition is no longer seeking to obtain ballot position.
(6)(a) •"dl elector's signatare ea a jletitiea form may be re•1eked "ithia 15Q da:,s efthe date ea which he er she signed the jletitien form by sabmittiag te the ajljlrejll'iate sapel'Viser ef eleetieas a sigHed jletitien re,eeatiea form.
(b) The jletitiea reveeatiea form and the mann& ia •Nhich sigaatares are ebtaiaed, submitted, aad , el'ified shall be subject te the same rele•1aat re(jwremeats aad timelfoames as the eerrespeadiag jletitien form and jlreeesses \lftder this eede and shall be "''I'FB, ed llj the Seeretafj ef State before aay signatare en a petition re, eeatiea form is ebtaifted.
(e) Ia these eireumstanees in whieb a jletitiea re, eeatien form for a eerrespending initiati •e jletitiea has aet beea Slibmitted aBd ajljlFe , ell, aa electer may complete aa& s..bmit a staBdard jletitieB re •eeatieft form &ireetly ta the sapeF\•iser ef eleetiens. All ether re(jHiremeats and jlFeeesses "1'1'1~ for the Slibmissiea _aa& ·, erificati9ft ef the signatares as for imtiati •e petitiaB!r.
(d) Sapetvisers ef eleetieHS shall jlre•lille petition reveeatien forms te the public at all maffi and branch efliees.
(e) The jlCtitieB re •seatien form shall be filed with the SlijlCF\ iser ef
eleetiefts ey Febmftfj 1 jlreeelling the nCJft gCBeral election er, if the
31 CODING: Words BtPiekeft ere deletions; words .uru:IJlrlined ere additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

initiati•:e amendmeat is net ee!'tified fer ballet jlesitien in that eleetien, by Februafj 1 jlreee&ing the nelfl; saeeessi, e general eleetiea. The s lijleF\ iser ef eleetieHS shall jlremjltry , eriey the eignatare ea the jletitien reveeatien farm an& jlreeess sach re·:eeatien ajlen jlayJRCnt, in a&vanee, efa fee ef 1Q eeats er the aetaal east efverizyiag sach signatare, nhlcheoe!' is less. The Slijle;t'Viser shall jlremjltry reeer& each. , ali& aa& , &ified signatare ea a jlCtitien
re•/eeatiea farm mthe manner jlreseribe& by the Secretary ef State.
(0 The di. isiBB shall adejlt b~ rule the petition re, ecatien forms te be ased aader this sabseetien.
12m The Department of State may adopt rules in accordance with s. 120.54 to carry out the provisions of subsections L.!Hlil tl}(6).
{1}(8) No provision of this code shall be deemed to prohibit a private person exercising lawful control over privately owned property, including property held open to the public for the purposes of a commercial enterprise, from excluding from such property persons seeking to engage in activity supporting or opposing initiative amendments.
Section 24. Effective July 1, 2012, subsections (3) and (4) of section 101.001, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
101.001 Precincts and polling places; boundaries.-
(3)(a) Each supervisor of elections shall maintain a suitable map drawn to a scale no smaller than 3 miles to the inch and clearly delineating all major observable features such as roads, streams, and railway lines and showing the current geographical boundaries ofeach precinct, representative district, and senatorial district, and other type of district in the county subject to the elections process in this code.
(b) The supervisor shall provide to the department data on all mecincts in the county associated with the most recent decennial census blocks within each precinct.
(c) The department shall maintain a searchable database that contains the precincts and the couesnonding most recent decennial census blocks within the precincts for each county including a historical file that allows the census blocks to be traced through the prior decade.
fd}(h) The supervisor of elections shall notifY the Secretary of State in writing within 1J! 3Q days after any reorganization of precincts and shall furnish a copy of the map showing the current geographical boundaries and designation of each new precinct. However, if precincts are composed of whole census blocks, the supervisor may furnish, in lieu of a copy ofthe map, a list, in an electronic format prescribed by the Department of State, associating each census block in the county with its precinct.
fel(el Any precinct established or altered under the provisions of this section shall consist of areas bounded on all sides only by census block
32 CODING: Words stPiekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 45 PageID 243

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

boundaries from the most recent United States Census. If the census block boundaries split or conflict with another political boundary listed below the boundary listed below may be used:
1. Censas hleek henna!ll'ies fFem the mast reeent United States Censas;
L2. Governmental unit boundaries reported in the most recent Boundary and Annexation Survey published by the United States Census Bureau;
2.&. Visible features that are readily distinguishable upon the ground, such as streets, railroads, tracks, streams, and lakes, and that are indicated upon current census maps, official Department of Transportation maps, official municipal maps, official county maps, or a combination of such maps;
il...-4. Boundaries of public parks, public school grounds, or churches; or
.4.._&. Boundaries of counties, incorporated municipalities, or other political subdivisions that meet criteria established by the United States Census Bureau for block boundaries.
(a) Until Jaly 1, 2g12, a SH!lerviser may ai'I'IY fer and elltain fFem the Seereta~ ef State a "ai. er ef the relj~irement in l'a•agral'h (e).
(4)(llj Within 10 days after there is any change in the division, number, or boundaries of the precincts, or the location of the polling places, the supervisor of elections shall make in writing an accurate description of any new or altered precincts, setting forth the boundary lines and shall identify the location of each new or altered polling place. A copy of the document describing such changes shall be posted at the supervisor's office.
(b) Any changes in the county precinct data shall be provided to the .d.!marlment within 10 days after a change.
(c) Precinct data shall include all precincts for which precinct-level election results and votine- history results are renorted.
Section 25. Section 101.043, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.043 Identification required at polls.-
(1)J..a.) The precinct register, as prescribed ins. 98.461, shall be used at the polls for the putpose of identifYing the elector at the polls before prier--te allowing him or her to vote. The clerk or inspector shall require each elector, upon entering the polling place, to present one of the following current and valid picture identifications:
L(al Florida driver's license.
2.\bl Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
il...(e) United States passport.
33 CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

.i.W Debit or credit card.

li.fel Military identification.

Q,{f) Student identification.

1..{gl Retirement center identification.

a.W Neighborhood association identification.

l!.\il Public assistance identification.

""*""'• ilil If the picture identification does not contain the signature of the

elector

an additional identification that provides the elector's Yater's

signature shall be required. The address appearing on the identification

presented bv the elector may not be used as the basis to confirm an elector's

legal residence or otherwise challenge an elector's legal residence. The

elector shall sign his or her name in the space provided on the precinct

register or on an electronic device provided for recording the elector's Yater's

signature. The clerk or inspector shall compare the signature with that on

the identification provided by the elector and enter his or her initials in the

space provided on the precinct register or on an electronic device provided for

that purpose and allow the elector to vote if the clerk or inspector is satisfied

as to the identity of the elector.

(c) When an elector presents his or her picture identification to the clerk or inspector and the elector's address on the picture identification matches the elector's address in the supervisor's records, the elector may not be asked to vrovide additional information or to recite his or her home address.

(2) If the elector fails to furnish the required identification, the elector shall be allowed to vote a provisional ballot. The canvassing board shall determine the validity of the ballot pursuant to s. 101.048(2).

Section 26. Section 101.045, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

101.045 Electors must be registered in precinct; provisions for change of residence or name.-

(1) A Ne person is not shall-he permitted to vote in any election precinct or district other than the one in which the person has his or her legal residence and in which the person is registered. However, a person temporarily residing outside the county shall be registered in the precinct in which the main office ofthe supervisor, as designated by the supervisor, is located when the person has no permanent address in the county and it is the person's intention to remain a resident of Florida and of the county in which he or she is registered to vote. Such persons who are registered in the precinct in which the main office of the supervisor, as designated by the supervisor, is located and who are residing outside the county with no permanent address in the county shall not be registered electors of a
34 CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 45 PageID 244

Cb. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

municipality and therefore shall not be permitted to vote in any municipal election.
(2)(a) An elector who moves from the precinct in which the elector is registered may be permitted to vote in the precinct to which he or she has moved his or her legal residence, if the chanu-e ofresidence is within the same county and the l'•.....;ded saeh elector completes an affirmation in substantially the following form:
Change of Legal Residence of Registered Voter
Under penalties for false swearing, I, ...(Name of voter)..., swear (or affirm) that the former address· of my legal residence was ...(Address of legal residence)... in the municipality of ......, in ...... County, Florida, and I was registered to vote in the ...... precinct of ...... County, Florida; that I have not voted in the precinct of my former registration in this election; that I now reside at ...(Address oflegal residence)... in the Municipality of ......, in ...... County, Florida, and am therefore eligible to vote in the ...... precinct of ...... County, F1orida; and I further swear (or affirm) that I am otherwise legally registered and entitled to vote.
...(Signature of voter whose address oflegal residence has changed)...
(b) Except for an active uniformed services voter or a member ofhis or her family an elector whose change ofaddress is from outside the county may not change his or her legal residence at the wiling place and vote a regular ballot' however such elector is entitled to vote a provisional ballot
WM An elector whose name changes because of marriage or other legal process may be permitted to vote, provided such elector completes an affirmation in substantially the following form:
Change of Name of Registered Voter
Under penalties for false swearing, I, ...(New name of voter)... , swear (or affirm) that my name has been changed because of marriage or other legal process. My former name and address of legal residence appear on the registration records of precinct ...... as follows:
Name .................................................... .
Address .................................................. .
Municipality............................................... .
County ................................................... .
Florida, Zip ............................................... .
My present name and address of legal residence are as follows:
35 CODING: Words strielteft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

Name .................................................... .
Address .................................................. .
Municipality............................................... .
County ................................................... .
Florida, Zip ............................................... .
and I further swear (or affirm) that I am otherwise legally registered and entitled to vote.
...(Signature of voter whose name has changed)...
(!ll{el Instead of the affirmation contained in paragraph (a) or paragraph .(£)(b), an elector may complete a voter registration application that indicates the change of name or change of address of legal residence.
~ Such affirmation or application, when completed and presented at the precinct in which such elector is entitled to vote, and upon verification of the elector's registration, shall entitle such elector to vote as provided in this subsection. If the elector's eligibility to vote cannot be determined, he or she shall be entitled to vote a provisional ballot, subject to the requirements and procedures in s. 101.048. Upon receipt of an affirmation or application certifying a change in address oflegal residence or name, the supervisor shall as soon as practicable make the necessary changes in the statewide voter registration system to indicate the change in address of legal residence or name of such elector.
Section 27. Subsection (2) of section 101.131, Florida Statutes, is amended, and subsections (4) and (5) are added to that section, to read:
101.131 Watchers at polls.-
(2) Each party, each political cammittee, and each candidate requesting to have poll watchers shall designate, in writing to the supervisors of elections, on a form wescribed by the division, l!di!rl: jlf'ieF-te noon of the second Tuesday preceding the election poll watchers for each polling room on election day. Designations of poll watchers fot early voting areas shall be submitted in writing to the supervisor of elections on a form prescribed by the division before noon at least 14 days before early voting begins. Tbe poll watchers for eaeh polling rooms........, shall be approved by the supervisor of elections on or before the Tuesday before the election. Poll watchers for early voting areas shall be approved by the supervisor of elections no later than 7 days before early voting begins. The supervisor shall furnish to each election board a list of the poll watchers designated and approved for such polling r!!l!IDl!........, or early voting l!Illl!ll.....,. Designation of poll watchers shall be made by the chair of the county executive committee of a political party the chair of a politiq!l committee or the candidate requesting to have poll
~
36 CODING: Words stfleken are deletions; words underlined are additions_

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 45 PageID 245

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(4) All poll watchers shall be allowed to enter and watch polls in all polling rooms and early voting areas within the county in which they have been designated if the number ofpoll watchers at any particular polling place does not exceed the number provided in this section
(5) The supervisor of elections shall provide to each designated poll watcher. no later than 7 days before early voting begins a poll watcher identification badge that identifies the poll watcher by name Each poll watcher must wear his or her identification badge while in the polling room or early voting area.
Section 28. Subsections (1), (2), and (3) of section 101.151, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
101.151 Specifications for ballots.-
(l)(a) Marksense ballots shall be printed on paper of such thickness that the printing cannot be distinguished from the back and shall meet the specifications of the voting system that will be used to tabulate the ballots.
(b) Early voting sites may employ a ballot-on-demand production system to print individual marksense ballots, including provisional ballots, for eligible electors pursuant to s. 101.657. Ballot-on-demand technology may be used to produce marksense absentee and election-day ballots. Nat later than 3Q days before an election, the Secretary af State may also aathari•e in writing the ase afballst sn demand teehnalagy fur the flredaetian afeleetian day ballets.
(2)(a) The ballot shall have the following office titles flea<liHgs under which shall appear the names afthe alfiees and the names of the candidates for the respective offices in the following order:
1,_ The office titles of hetuliBg-"President and Vice President• and thereunder the names of the candidates for President and Vice President of the United States nominated by the political party that received the highest vote for Governor in the last general election of the Governor in this state. Then shall appear the names of other candidates for President and Vice President of the United States who have been properly nominated.
2. The office titles TheH shall fullaw the heading "Cangressianal" and thereander the sftiees of Uuited States Senator and Representative in Congress,;
3. The office titles then the heading "State" and thereander the alfiees of Governor and Lieutenant Governor;, Attorney General;, Chief Financial Officer;, Commissioner of Agriculture;, State Attorney, with the applica!>k judicial circuit' and Public Defender, with the applicable judicial circuit.
i,_ together with the names af the candidates fer each alfice and the title sf the alfice which they seek; then the heading "Legislative" and thereUHder The office titles efllees of State Senator and State Representative with the
37 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

applicable district for the office printed beneath.; thea the heading "Ca....ty" and- thereUH<iet'
;;. The office titles of Clerk of the Circuit Court, or Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller (whichever is applicable and when authorized by
lruv1 Clerk of the County Court (when authorized by law), Sheriff, Property
Appraiser, Tax Collector, District Superintendent of Schools, and Supervisor of Elections.
6. The office titles Thereafter fullaws: members of the Board of County Commissioners with the applicable district printed beneath each office, and such other county and district offices as are involved in the election, in the order fixed by the Department ofState, followed, in the year of their election, by "Party Offices," and thereunder the offices of state and county party executive conunittee members.
ilil In a general election, in addition to the names printed on the ballot, a blank space shall be provided under each heading fur an office for which a write-in candidate has qualified. With respect to write-in candidates, if two or more candidates are seeking election to one office, only one blank space shall be provided.
~ When more than one candidate is nominated for office, the candidates for such office shall qualify and run in a group or district, and the group or district number shall be printed beneath the name of the office. Each nominee of a political party chosen in a primary shall appear on the general election ballot in the same numbered group or district as on the primary election ballot.
@\e) If in any election all the offices as set forth in paragraph (a) are not involved, those offices not to be filled shall be omitted and the remaining offices shall be arranged on the ballot in the order named.
(3)(a) The names of the candidates of the party that received the highest number of votes for Governor in the last election in which a Governor was elected shall be placed first >mder the heading for each office on the general election ballot, together with an appropriate abbreviation of the party name; the names ofthe candidates ofthe party that received the second highest vote for Governor shall be placed second UHder the heading for each office, together with an appropriate abbreviation of the party name.
(b) Minor political party candidates aHd eaHdidates ., ith He part) alfiliatieH shall have their names appear on the general election ballot following the names of recognized political parties, in the same order as they were qualified eertifled followed by the names of candidates with no party affiliation in the order as they were qualified.
Section 29. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.161 Referenda; ballots.-
38 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 45 PageID 246

Ch. 201140

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

(1) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to tbe vote of the people, a ballot summary the siibstanee of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on tbe ballot after tbe list of candidates, followed by tbe word "yes" and also by tbe word "no," and shall be styled in such a manner tbat a "yes" vote will indicate approval ofthe proposal and a "no" vote will indicate rejection. The ballot summary ·.vardiag af the aiibstanee of tbe amendment or other public measure and tbe ballot title to appear on the ballot· shall be embodied in tbe joint resalutian, constitutional revision commission proposal, constitutional convention proposal, taxation and budget reform commission proposal, or enabling resolution or ordinance. The ballot summary Elfeeflt fop amendmenta and l!allat langHage flFBflesed l!yjeint resal..tian, the s"bstanee ofthe amendment or otber public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose oftbe measure. In addition, for every amendment proposed by initiative, the ballot shall include, following the ballot summary, a separate financial impact statement concerning the measure prepared by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference in accordance with s. 100.371(5). The ballot title shall consist ofa caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. This subsection does not aooly to constitutional amendments or reyisions Proposed by joint resolution.
(2) The ballot summary stil!stanee and ballot title of a constitutional amendment proposed by initiative shall be prepared by the sponsor and approved by the Secretary of State in accordance with rules adopted pursuant to s. 120.54. The Department of State shall give each proposed constitutional amendment a designating number for convenient reference. This number designation shall appear on the ballot. Designating numbers shall be assigned in the order offiling or certification and in accordance witb rules adopted by tbe Department of State. The Department of State shall furnish the designating number, tbe ballot title, and unless otherwise specified in a joint resolution the ballot summary tfte-stii!stanee of each amendment to tbe supervisor of elections of each county in which such amendment is to be voted on.
(3)(a) Each joint resolution that proposes a constitutional amendment or revision shall include one or more ballot statements set forth in order of priority Each ballot statement shall consist of a ballot title by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of not exceeding 15 words in length and either a ballot summary that describes the chief purpose of the amendment or revision in clear and unambiguous language or tbe full text of the amendment or revision The Department of State shall furnish a desi~ng number pursuant to subsection (2) and the a.poropriate ballot statement to the S!!Pervisor of elections ofeach county The ballot statement shall be printed on the ballot after the list of candidates followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no," and shall be styled in such a manner that a
"yes" vote will indicate approval ofthe amendment or revision and a "no" yote
will indicate rejection
39 CODING: Words &triekeB are deletions; words .YD.de.rlineQ are additions.

Ch. 201140

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

(bll. Any action for a judicial determination that one or more ballot statements embodied in a joint resolution are defective must be commenced bv filing a complaint or petition with the appropriate court within 30 davs after the joint resolution is filed witb tbe Secretary ofState The comolaint or petition shall assert all grounds for challenge to each ballot statement. Any ground not asserted within 30 days after the joint resolution is filed with the Secretary of State is waived
2. The court including any appellate court shall accord an action described in subparagraph 1. prioritv oyer otber pending cases and render a decision as e>q>editiously as possible If tbe court finds that all ballot statements embodied in a joint resolution are defective and further appeals are declined abandoned or exhausted unless otherwise provided in the ioint resolution the Attorney General shall within 10 days prepare and submit to the Department ofState a revised ballot title or ballot summary that corrects the deficiencies identified by the court and the Department of State shall furnish a designating number and the revised ballot title or ballot summary to the supervisor of elections of each county for placement on the ballot The court shall retain jurisdiction oyer challenges to a revised ballot title or ballot summary prepared by the Attorney General and any challenge to a revised .ballot title or ballot summary must be filed within 10 days after a revised ballot title or ballot summary is submitted to the Department of State.
3 A ballot statement that consists of the full text of an amendment or riwision shall be presumed to be a clear and unambiguous statement of the substance and effect of the amendment or revision providing fair notice to the electors of the content of the amendment or revision and sufficiently advisinG" eJectors of the issue upon which they are to yote
ID3J(a) For any general election in which the Secretary of State, for any circuit, or tbe supervisor of elections, for any county, has ·certified the ballot position for an initiative to change the method of selection of judges, the ballot for any circuit must contain the statement in paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) and the ballot for any county must contain the statement in paragraph (d) or paragraph (e).
(b) In any circuit where the initiative is to change tbe selection of circuit court judges to selection by merit selection and retention, the ballot shall state: "Shall tbe metbod of selecting circuit court judges in tbe ...(number of the circuit)... judicial circuit be changed from election by a vote of the people to selection by the judicial nominating commission and appointment by the Governor witb subsequent terms determined by a retention vote of the people?" This statement must be followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no."
(c) In any circuit where tbe initiative is to change the selection of circuit court judges to election by the voters, the ballot shall state: "Shall tbe method of selecting circuit court judges in the ...(number of the circuit)... judicial circuit be changed from selection by tbe judicial nominating commission and appointment by the Governor with subsequent terms determined by a
40 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 22 of 45 PageID 247

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

retention vote of the people to election by a vote of the people?" This statement must be followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no."
(d) In any county where the initiative is to change the selection of county court judges to merit selection and retention, the ballot shall state: "Shall the method of selecting county court judges in ...(name of county)... be changed from election by a vote of the people to selection by the judicial nominating commission and appointment by the Governor with subsequent terms determined by a retention vote of the people?" This statement must be followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no."
(e) In any county where the initiative is to change the selection of county court judges to election by the voters, the ballot shall state: "Shall the method of selecting county court judges in ...(name of the county)... be changed from selection by the judicial nominating commission and appointment by the Governor with subsequent terms determined by a retention vote ofthe people to election by a vote of the people?" This statement must be followed by the word "yes" and also by the word "no."
Section 30. The amendment of section 101.161 Florida Statutes, made by this act applies retroactively to all joint resolutions adopted by the Legislature during the 2011 Regular Session. except that any legal action challenging a ballot title or ballot summary embodied in such joint resolution or challenging placement on the ballot of the full text of the proposed amendment or revision to the State Constitution as specified in such joint resolution must be commenced within 30 days after the effective date of this act or within 30 days after the joint resolution to which a challenge relates is filed with the Secretary of State whichever occurs later.
Section 31. Paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 101.5605, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.5605 Examination and approval of equipment.-
(2)(a) Any person owning or interested in an electronic or electromechanical voting system may submit it to the Department of State for examination. The vote counting segment·shall be certified after a satisfactory evaluation testing has been performed according to the standards adopted under s. 101.015(1) eleetPoHie iHdustey standa•ds. This testing shall include, but is not limited to, testing of all software required for the voting system's operation; the ballot reader; the rote processor, especially in its logic and memory components; the digital printer; the fail-safe operations; the counting center environmental requirements; and the equipment reliability estimate. For the purpose of assisting in examining the system, the department shall employ or contract for services of at least one individual who is expert in one or more fields of data processing, mechanical engineering, and public administration and shall require from the individual a written report of his or her examination.
41 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

Section 32. Subsection (11) of section 101.5606, Florida Statutes, is amended to read

101.5606 Requirements for approval of systems.-No electronic or electromechanical voting system shall be approved by the Department of State unless it is so constructed that:

(11) It is capable of automatically producing precinct totals in printed, marked, er fmnefled form, ar a eembinatien the:reef.

Section 33. Subsection (4) is added to section 101.56075, Florida Statutes, to read:

101.56075 Voting methods.-

(4) By December 31 2013 all voting systems utilized by voters during a state election shall permit placement on the ballot of the full text of a constitutional amendment or revision containing stricken or underlined text.

Section 34. Paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section 101.5612, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

101.5612 Testing of tabulating equipment.-

(4)(a)1. For electronic or electromechanical voting systems configured to include electronic or electromechanical tabulation devices which are distributed to the precincts, all or a sample of the devices to be used in the election shall be publicly tested. If a sample is to be tested, the sample shall consist of a random selection of at least 5 percent or 10 of the devices for an
optical scan system BF 2 pereent efthe de iees fer a teaehsereen B;} stem er lQ of the ileviees for either system, as applieahle, whichever is greater. For touchscreen systems used for voters having a disability a sample ofat least 2 percent of the devices must be tested. The test shall be conducted by processing a group of ballots, causing the device to output results for the ballots processed, and comparing the output of results to the results expected for the ballots processed. The group of ballots shall be produced so as to record a predetermined number ofvalid votes f<>r each candidate and on each measure and to include for each office one or more ballots which have activated voting positions in excess of the number allowed by law in order to test the ability of the tabulating device to reject such votes.

2. If any tested tabulating device is found to have an error in tabulation, it shall be deemed unsatisfactory. For each device deemed unsatisfactory, the canvassing board shall take steps to determine the cause of the error, shall attempt to identify and test other devices that could reasonably be expected to have the same error, and shall test a number of additional devices sufficient to determine that all devices are satisfactory. Upon deeming any device unsatisfactory, the canvassing board may require all devices to be tested or may declare that all devices are unsatisfactory.

.

42

CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 23 of 45 PageID 248

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

3. If the operation or output of any tested tabulation device, such as spelling or the order ofcandidates on a report, is in error, such problem shall be reported to the canvassing board. The canvassing board shall then determine if the reported problem warrants its deeming the device unsatisfactory.
Section 35. Subsection (4) of section 101.5614, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.5614 Canvass of returns.-
(4) Ifballet etmls are HSed, aad separate write ia ballets BF ea'lelepes fer eastiag vlrite ia •etes are Hsed, ,;rite iH ballets BF tile ea, elopes BH 'Nhieh write iH ballets ha•,•e beea east shall be serially HH1f>beFed, start.iftg with tile HHmBeF eae, aad the same ffiHilbeF shall be plaeed BB tile laallat eard af tile ·.•ateF. This preeess mey lae eompleted at eitileF tile preeiaet lay tile eleetioa boam BF at tile eeatrel eoHBtiBg loeatioft. For each ballot or ballot image aBd ballot ea.elepe on which write-in votes have been cast, the canvassing board shall compare the write-in votes with the votes cast on the ballot eard; if the total number of votes for any office exceeds the number allowed by law, a aotatioa te teat elfeet, speeieyiag tile oftiee ia.el.ed, shall be eateFed BB tile laaek oftile ballot eard oF ia a mBFgia if, otiftg areas BFe pFiRted Oft laotil sides of the ballot eaFEI. such votes shall not be counted. All valid votes shall be tallied by the canvassing board.
Section 36. Subsection (6) is added to section 101.591, Florida Statutes, to read:
101.591 Voting system audit.-
(6) If a manual recount is undertaken pursuant to s 102 166 the canvassing board is not required to perfonn the audit provided for in this
~
Section 37. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) and subsections (3) and (4) of section 101.62, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
101.62 Request for absentee ballots.-
(l)(a) The supervisor shall accept a request for an absentee ballot from an elector in person or in writing. One request shall be deemed sufficient to receive an absentee ballot for all elections through the end of the calendar ~the second ensuin~r .....t regularly scheduled general election, unless the elector or the elector's designee indicates at the time the request is made the elections for which the elector desires to receive an absentee ballot. Such request may be considered canceled when any first-class mail sent by the supervisor to the elector is returned as undeliverable.
(b) The supervisor may accept a written or telephonic request for an absentee ballot from the elector, or, if directly instructed by the elector, a member ofthe elector's immediate family, or the elector's legal guardian. For
43 CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words .1ill..d.er.li. are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

purposes of this section, the term "immediate family" has the same meaning as specified in paragraph ill(cl f4*1al. The person making the request must disclose:
1. The name of the elector for whom the ballot is requested.
2. The elector's address.
3. The elector's date of birth.
4. The requester's name.
5. The requester's address.
6. The requester's driver's license number, if available.
7. The requester's relationship to the elector.
8. The requester's signature (written requests only).
(3) For each request for an absentee ballot received, the supervisor shall record the date the request was made, the date the absentee ballot was delivered to the voter or the voter's designee or the date the absentee ballot was delivered to the post office or other carrier, the date the ballot was received by the supervisor, and such other information he or she may deem necessary. This information shall be provided in electronic format as provided by rule adopted by the division. The information shall be updated and made available no later than 8 a.m. Be6D of each day including weekends beginning 60 days before the primary until 15 days after the general election and shall be contemporaneously provided to the division. This information shall be confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and shall be made available to or reproduced only for the voter requesting the ballot, a canvassing board, an election official, a political party or official thereof, a candidate who has filed qualification papers and is opposed in an upcoming election, and registered political committees or registered committees of continuous existence, for political purposes only.
(4)(a) No later than 45 days before each presidential preference primarv election primacy eJection and general election, the supervisor of elections shall send an absentee ballot as provided in subparagraph ll;12. \1>)2. to each absent uniformed services voter and to each overseas voter who has requested an absentee ballot.
(b) The supervisor of elections shall mail an absentee ballot to each absent qualified voter other than those listed in paragraph (a) who has requested such a ballot between the 35th and 28th days before the presidential preference primary election primary election and general election Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2) and after the period described in this Pl!rJ!lrraph, the supervisor shall mail absentee ballots within 2 business days after receiving a request for such a ballot
44 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words~ are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 24 of 45 PageID 249

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

fl;}(bl The supervisor shall provide an absentee ballot to each elector by whom a request for that ballot has been made by one of the following means:
1. By nonforwardable, return-if-undeliverable mail to the elector's current mailing address on file with the supervisor or, IHiless the eleeteF speeilies in the Fe<jHest that:
a. The eleeteF is absent fFem the ee~ IHld does not pliHl te retHrn aefeFe the-day-e!'the-eleetioo;
a. The eleeteF is tempBFaFifj Hnaale te """""~ the Fesidenee aeeaase sf luurieane, temade, f.leed, fire, er ether emergeney eF ne-t1ual disasteFt-ef'
e. The eleeteF is in a hespital, assisted living faeility, naFsing heme, shaFt term medieal BF Fehaailitatisn faeility, BF eeFFeetienal facility,
in whieh ease the S"!'eFYiseF shall mail the ballet by nenfeF'\vaFdaale, •etarn if 118deli, emilie mail te any other address the elector specifies in the request.
2. By forwardable mail, e-mail, or facsimile machine transmission to absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters. The absent uniformed services voter or overseas voter may designate in the absentee ballot request the preferred method of transmission. If the voter does not designate the method of transmission, the absentee ballot shall be mailed.
3. By personal delivery before 7 p.m. on election day to the elector, upon presentation of the identification required in s. 101.043.
4. By delivery to a designee on election day or up to 5 days prior to the day of an election. Any elector may designate in writing a person to pick up the ballot for the elector; however, the person designated may not pick up more than two absentee ballots per election, other than the designee's own ballot, except that additional ballots may be picked up for members ofthe designee's immediate family. For purposes of this section, "immediate family" means the designee's spouse or the parent, child, grandparent, or sibling of the designee or of the designee's spouse. The designee shall provide to the supervisor the written authorization by the elector and a picture identification of the designee and must complete an affidavit. The designee shall state in the affidavit that the designee is authorized by the elector to pick up that ballot and shall indicate if the elector is a member of the designee's immediate family and, if so, the relationship. The department shall prescribe the form of the affidavit. If the supervisor is satisfied that the designee is authorized to pick up the ballot and that the signature of the elector on the written authorization matches the signature of the elector on file, the supervisor shall give the ballot to that designee for delivery to the elector.
Section 38. Section 101.65, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.65 Instructions to absent electors.-The supervisor shall enclose with each absentee ballot separate printed instructions in substantially the following form:
45 CODING: Words atFiel<eH are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE MARKING BALLOT.
1. VERY IMPORTANT. In order to ensure that your absentee ballot will be counted, it should be completed and returned as soon as possible so that it can reach the supervisor of elections of the county in which your precinct is located no later than 7 p.m. on the day of the election.
2. Mark your ballot in secret as instructed on the ballot. You must mark your own ballot unless you are unable to do so because of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write.
3. Mark only the number of candidates or issue choices for a race as indicated on the ballot. Ifyou are allowed to "Vote for One" candidate and you vote for more than one candidate, your vote in that race will not be counted.
4. Place your marked ballot in the enclosed secrecy envelope.
5. Insert the secrecy envelope into the enclosed mailing envelope which is addressed to the supervisor.
6. Seal the mailing envelope and completely fill out the Voter's Certificate on the back of the mailing envelope.
7. VERY IMPORTANT. In order for your absentee ballot to be counted, you must sign your name on the line above (Voter's Signature). An absentee ballot will be considered illegal and not be counted if the signature on the voter's certificate does not match the signature on record. The signature on file at the start ofthe canvass of the absentee ballots is the signature that will be used to verifY your signature on the voter's certificate. If you need to update your signature for this election send your signature update on a voter registration application to your supervisor of elections so that it is received no later than the start of the canvassing of absentee ballots, which occurs no lLarJilu:_tbJwJ;.b_!LlJ)_th day before e!!LcJ;ion_dJ!Y,
8. VERY IMPORTANT. If you are an overseas voter, you must include the date you signed the Voter's Certificate on the line above (Date) or your ballot may not be counted.
9. Mail, deliver, or have delivered the completed mailing envelope. Be sure there is sufficient postage if mailed.
10. FELONY NOTICE. It is a felony under Florida law to accept any gift, payment, or gratuity in exchange for your vote for a candidate. It is also a felony under Florida law to vote in an election using a false identity or false \'ddress, or under any other circumstances making your ballot false or fraudulent.
Section 39. Subsection (1) of section 101.657, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
46 CODING: Words striekeR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 25 of 45 PageID 250

Cb. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011·40

101.657 Early voting.-
(l)(a) AB a convenience to the voter, the supervisor of elections shall allow an elector to vote early in the main or branch office of the supervisor. The supervisor shall mark, code, indicate on, or otherwise track the voter's precinct for each early voted ballot. In order for a branch office to be used for early voting, it shall be a permanent facility of the supervisor and shall have been designated and used as such for at least 1 year prior to the election. The supervisor may also designate any city hall or permanent public library facility as early voting sites; however, if so designated, the sites must be geographically located so as to provide all voters in the county an equal opportunity to cast a ballot, insofar· as is practicable. The results or tabulation of votes cast during early voting may not be made before the close of the polls on election day. Results shall be reported by precinct.
(b) The supervisor shall designate each early voting site by no later than the 30th day prior to an election and shall designate an early voting area, as defined ins. 97.021, at each early voting site. The supervisor shall provide to the division no later than the 30th day before an election the address of each early votin~ site and the hours that early yoting will occur at each site
(c) All early voting sites in a county shall be OJJCB Oft the same d~ s for the same amsiHlt of tiffie aad shall allow any person in line at the closing of an early voting site to vote.
(d) Early voting shall begin on the 1llth l&th day before an election that contains state or federal races and end on the .3N l!BEi day before till! an
election and. FoFJJIH'j'lOSes sf a special eleetioa held p•u,SHaat to s. lGG.lGl, early votiag shall begiB Oft the 8th d~ before "" electioa aad cad Oft the 2ad d~ befo•e "" electiOB. Elll'l) , otiag shall be provided for no less than 6 8
hours and no more than 12 hours per .diu' 'Neekday aad 8 hoW'S in the aggt>egate each ~eekead at each site during the applicable :ruiDlll! pefiodo.
The supervisor ofelections may provide early voting for elections that are not held in coniunction with a state or federal election However the supervisor has the discretion to determine the hours ofoperation ofearly voting sites in those elections. Earl) •otiBg sites shall spea BO sooaer thaB 7 a.m. aad close ao later thaB 7 p.m. oa each "J'plieable d~.
(e) Notwithstanding the requirements of s. 100.3605, municipalities may provide early voting in municipal elections that are not held in conjunction with county or state elections. If a municipality provides early voting, it may designate as many sites as necessary and shall conduct its activities in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs (a)-(c). The supervisor is not required to conduct early voting if it is provided pursuant to this subsection.
(0 Notwithstanding the requirements of s. 189.405, special districts may provide early voting in any district election not held in conjunction with county or state elections. If a special district provides early voting, it may designate as many sites as necessary and shall conduct its activities in
47 CODING: Words stfleken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Cb. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

accordance with the provisions of paragraphs (a)-(c). The supervisor is not required to conduct early voting if it is provided pursuant to this subsection.
Section 40. Paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 101.68, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.68 Canvassing of absentee ballot.-
(2)(a) The county canvassing board may begin the canvassing of absentee ballots at 7 a.m. on the llill! shrth day before the election, but not later than noon on the day following the election. In addition, for any county using electronic tabulating equipment, the processing of absentee ballots through such tabulating equipment may begin at 7 a.m. on the 15th sHoth day before the election. However, notwithstanding any such authorization to begin canvassing or otherwise processing absentee ballots early, no result shall be released until after the closing ofthe polls in that county on election day. Any supervisor of elections, deputy supervisor of elections, canvassing board member, election board member, or election employee who releases the results ofa canvassing or processing ofabsentee ballots prior to the closing of the polls in that county on election day commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Section 41. Subsection (2) of section 101.6923, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.6923 Special absentee ballot instructions for certain first-time voters.-
(2) A voter covered by this section shall be provided with printed instructions with his or her absentee ballot in substantially the following form:

READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE MARKING YOUR BALLOT. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS MAY CAUSE YOUR BALLOT NOT TO COUNT.

1. In order to ensure that your absentee ballot will be counted, it should be completed and returned as soon as possible so that it can reach the supervisor ofelections ofthe county in which your precinct is located no later than 7 p.m. on the date of the election.
2. Mark your ballot in secret as instructed on the ballot. You must mark your own ballot unless you are unable to do ·so because of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write.
3. Mark only the number of candidates or issue choices for a race as indicated on the ballot. Ifyou are allowed to "Vote for One" candidate and you vote for more than one, your vote in that race will not be counted.
48 CODING: Words stftelreft are deletions; words~ are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 26 of 45 PageID 251

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

4. Place your marked ballot in the enclosed secrecy envelope and seal the envelope.
5. Insert the secrecy envelope into the enclosed envelope bearing the Voter's Certificate. Seal the envelope and completely fill out the Voter's Certificate on the back of the envelope.
a. You must sign your name on the line above (Voter's Signature).
b. If you are an overseas voter, you must include the date you signed the Voter's Certificate on the line above (Date) or your ballot may not be counted.
c. An absentee ballot will be considered illegal and will not be counted if t.h~~ilmi!LUI:!LQ!J the Voter's Certificate (i.QM..llQLmatch the sigMtl!re on record. The sigJJature on file at the start ofthe canvass ofthe absentee ballots is the signature that will be used to verify your sigJJature on the Voter's Certificate. If you need to update your signature for this election send your signature update on a voter registration application to your supervisor of elections so that it is received no later than the start of canvassing of absentee ballots which occurs no earlier than the 15th day before election
m
6. Unless you meet one of the exemptions in Item 7., you must make a copy of one of the following forms of identification:
a. Identification which must include your name and photograph: United States passport; debit or credit card; military identification; student identification; retirement center identification; neighborhood association identification; or public assistance identification; or
b. Identification which shows your name and current residence address: current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or government document (excluding voter identification card).
7. The identification requirements of Item 6. do not apply ifyou meet one of the following requirements:
a. You are 65 years of age or older.
b. You have a temporary or permanent physical disability.
c. You are a member of a uniformed service on active duty who, by reason of such active duty, will be absent from the county on election day.
d. You are a member of the Merchant Marine who, by reason of service in the Merchant Marine, will be absent from the county on election day.
e. You are the spouse or dependent of a member referred to in paragraph c. or paragraph d. who, by reason of the active duty or service of the member, will be absent from the county on election day.
f. You are currently residing outside the United States.
49 CODING: Words stfleken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

8. Place the envelope bearing the Voter's Certificate into the mailing envelope addressed to the supervisor. Insert a copy of your identification in the mailing envelope. DO NOT PUT YOUR IDENTIFICATION INSIDE THE SECRECY ENVELOPE WITH THE BALLOT OR INSIDE THE ENVELOPE WHICH BEARS THE VOTER'S CERTIFICATE OR YOUR BALLOT WILL NOT COUNT.
9. Mail, deliver, or have delivered the completed mailing envelope. Be sure there is sufficient postage if mailed.
10. FELONY NOTICE. It is a felony under Florida law to accept any gift, payment, or gratuity in exchange for your vote for a candidate. It is also a felony under Florida law to vote in an election using a false identity or false address, or under any other circumstances making your ballot false or fraudulent.
Section 42. Subsection (3) of section 101.75, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
101.75 Municipal elections; change of dates for cause.-
(3) Notwithstanding any provision of local law or municipal charter, the governing body of a municipality may, by ordinance, move the date of any municipal election to a date concurrent with any statewide or countywide election. The dates for qualifying for the election moved by the passage of such ordinance shall be specifically provided for in the ordinance aruJ...shall run fop na less th!lB 14 days. The term of office for any elected muuicipal official shall commence as provided by the relevant municipal charter or ordinance.
Section 43. Subsection (4) of section 102.141, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
102.141 County canvassing board; duties.-
(4) The canvassing board shall reoort all early voting and all tabulated absentee results to the Department ofState within 30 minutes after the polls close. Thereafter the canvassing board shall reoprt with the exception of provisional ballot results updated precinct election results to the department at least every 45 minutes until all results are completely reported. The supervisor of elections shall notify the department immediately of any circumstances that do not permit oeriodic updates as reJI!lired. Result!Lsh!!l) be submitted in a format prescribed by the department sHamit by 11:89 p.m. an eleetian night the pFelimiHary retHrns it has reeeived ta the Department sf State in a faFmat pFB •ided by the department.
Section 44. Subsection (4) of section 102.168, Florida Statutes, is amended, and subsection (8) is added to that section, to read:
102.168 Contest of election.-
50 CODING: Words 5tfteken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 27 of 45 PageID 252

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(4) The eeuBty canvassing board responsible for canvassing the election is an indispensable BREI prepe• party defendant in county and local e)ections,j The Elections Canvassing Commission is an indispensable aftd p•epe• party defendant in federal, state, and multicounty elections and in elections for justice ofthe Supreme Court judge ofa district court ofapnea) and judge of a circuit court mees;-arul The successful candidate is an indispensable party to any action brought to contest the election or nomination of a candidate.
(8) In anY contest that requires a review of the canvassine- board's decision on the Iee-ality ofan absentee ballot pursuant to s 101 68 based upon a comparison of the signature on the voter's certificate and the signature of the elector in the reiDstration records the circuit court may not review or consider any evidence other than the signatures on the voter's certificate and the signature of the elector in the re~stratjon records The court's review of such issue shall be to determine only if the canvassing board abused its discretion in making its decision
Section 45. Paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section 103.021, Florida Statutes, is amended to read;
103.021 Nomination for presidential electors.-Candidates for presiden· tial electors shall be nominated in the following manner:
(4Xa) A minor political party that is affiliated with a national party holding a national convention to nominate candidates for President and Vice President of the United States may have the names of its candidates for President and Vice President of the United States printed on the general election ballot by filing with the Department ofState a certificate namiog the candidates for President and Vice President and listing the required number ofpersons to serve as electors. Notification to the Department ofState under this subsection shall be made by September 1 of the year in which the election is held. When the Department of State has been so notified, it shall order the names of the candidates nominated by the minor political party to be included on the ballot and shall permit the required number of persons to be certified as electors in the same manner as other party candidates. As used in this section, the term "national party" means a political party that is registered with and recognized as a qualified national committee of a political party by the Federal Election Commission established aftd adlftitted te the ballet ;,. at let>St efte state sthe• tftBR Florida.
Section 46. Section 103.095, Florida Statutes, is created to read;
103.095 Minor political parties-
(1) Any group of citizens or~;:anjzed for the a-eneral purposes ofelectina- to office qualified nersons and determining public issues under the democratic processes of the United States may become a minor political party of this state by filing with the department a certificate showing the name of the or&'8flization the names and addresses ofits current officers includine- the members of its executive committee accompanied by a completed uniform
51 CODING: Words &tPiekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

statewide voter registration application as specified ins. 97.052 for each of its
current officers and members of its executive committee which reflect their
affiliation with the proposed minOr political party and a copy of its constitution, bylaws and rules and regulations.
(2) Each elector re&"istered to vote in the minor political party in which he or she has so designated has a fundamental ria-ht to fully and meaninld'ullv participate in the business and affairs of the minor pa\itical party without any monetary encumbrance. The constitution bylaws rules regulations or other equivalent documents must reflect this fundamental ri~ht and must provide for and contain reasonable provisions that at a minjmum prescribe procedures to: prescribe its membership· conduct its meetings accordini to a-enerally accepted parliamentary practices· timely notify its members as to the time date. and place of all of its meetings· timely publish notice on its public and functionin~;: website as to the time date and place of all of its meetings; elect its officers; remove its officers· make party nominations when required by law; conduct camnaigns for party nominees· raise and exuend party funds; select delegates to its national convention, if applicable; select presidential electors if applicable· and alter or amend all of its I:OYerninl;l documents.
(3) The members of the executive committee must elect a chair yice chair secretary and treasurer, all of whom shall be members of the minor political party and no member may hold more than one office excent that one person may hold the offices of secretary and treasurer,
(4) Upon apwoyal of the minor political party's 61ine- the department shall process the voter registration applications submitted by the minor political party's officers and members of its executive committee It shall be the duty of the minor political party to notify the department of anv chan~;:es in the filina- certificate within 5 days after such changes.
(5) The Division of Elections shall adopt rules to prescribe the manner in which political parties, including minor political parties may have their filings with the Department of State canceled. Such rules shall at a minimum provide for:
<al Notice which must contain the facts and conduct that warrant the intended action includin~;: but not limited to the failure to have anY voters recistered in the party the failure to notify the department of replacement officers the failure to file campaign finance reports the failure to adopt and file with the department all~;:overning documents containing: the provisions specified in subsection (2) and limited activity.
(b) Adequate opportunity to respond
(c) Appeal of the decision to the Florida Elections Commission. Such appeals are exempt from the confidentiality provisions of s. 106.25.
52 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 28 of 45 PageID 253

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(6) The requirements of this section are retroactive for any minor political party registered with the department on July 1 2011 and must be complied with within 180 days after the department provides notice to the minor political party ofthe requirements contained in this section. Failure of the minor political party to comply with the requirements within 180 days after receipt of the notice shall automatically result in the cancellation of the minor political party's registration
Section 47. Section 103.101, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
103.101 Presidential preference primary.-
(l)(a) There shall be a Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee composed of the Secretary of State who shall be a nonvoting chair· three members no more than two of whom may be from the same political party appointed by the Governor three members, no more than two of whom may be from the same political party, appointed by the Speaker of the House ofRepresentatives· and three members no more than two ofwhom may be from the same political party, appointed by the President of the Senate. No later than October 1 of the year preceding the presidential preference primary the committee shall meet and set a date for the presidential preference primary The date selected may be no earlier than the first Tuesday in January and no later than the first Tuesda,y in Ma,rch in the year of the presidential preference primary. The presidential preference prima,ry shall be held in each year the number of which is a multiple of four.
ilil Each political party other than a minor political party shall, on the date selected by the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee last Taesaay in Janaruy in each year the number of which is a multiple of 4, elect one person to be the candidate for nomination of such party for President of the United States or select delegates to the national
nominating convention, as provided by party rule. Any party rule directing the vote of delegates at a national nominating convention shall reasonably reflect the results of the presidential preference primarv if one is held.
(2)(a) TheFe shall be a P•esiaential Candidate Seleetien Committee eeml'ese!l ef the Seet'et~ sf State, "he shall be a non •sting chair; the Sl'eake• sf the Ha..se ef Rel'Fesentati, es; the P•esiaent sf the Senate; the minerit') leaae• sf eaeh hause sf the LegislataFe; ana the ehai• sf each !'Biitieal!'art') FCijUiFea te haYe a !'Fesiaefttiall'referenee !'rimary liftBeF this seetieft.
(hl By October 31 of the year preceding the presidential preference primary, each political party shall submit to the Secretary ofState a list of its presidential candidates to be placed on the presidential preference primary ballot or candidates entitled to have delegates appear on the presidential preference primary ballot. The Secretary ofState shall prepare and publish a list of the names of the presidential candidates submitted not later than on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the year preceding the presidential preference primacy. The Seeretary ef State shall s"bmit
53 CODING: Words striel<eR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

saeh list sf names sf pFesiaential ean!liaates te the seleetien eemmittee an the fimt T~esaa~ alte• the fi•st Menaay in Ne•,.embeF sf the ~ eBF p•eeeaing the presidential pFeferenee primruy. Eaeh pemen designated as a pFesiaen tial eanaiaate sltalllt!l'le hls SF ReF name appeBF, SFRI¥. e hls SF ReF delegates' flames appea•, aft the p•esiaeBtial prefereBee prim~ ballet rmless all eemmittee membeFs sf the same pelitieal pBFty as the eanaiaate agoee te delete saeh eaftaiaate's name &am the ballet.
(e) The seleetian eemmittee shall meet in Tallahassee an the fi•st Tttesaa) alter the fiFst Menaay iB Ne, embe• sf the ~ear preeeaing the presidential pFeferenee prim~ . The seleetien eemmittee shall publiely anneunee ana submit te the DepBF'oment sf State ne late• than li p.m. an the fells " ing !Ia) the flames sf pFesidential eanaiaates "Ita shall ha. e theiF names efJpeaF, SF "he B:Fe entitled te ha-ve theiF delegates' names appeaF, en the l'•esiaential prefeFenee l'rimruy ballet. The Department of State shall immediately notify each presidential candidate listed designated by the Secretary of State eemmittee. Such notification shall be in writing, by registered mail, with return receipt requested.
(3) A candidate's name shall be printed on the presidential preference primary ballot unless the candidate submits to the Department of State, prior to the second Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the year preceding the presidential preference primary, an affidavit stating that he or she is not now, and does not presently intend to become, a candidate for President at the upcoming nominating convention. If a candidate withdraws pursuant to this subsection, the Department of State shall notify the state executive committee that the candidate's name will not be placed on the ballot. The Department of State shall, no later than the third Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the year preceding the presidential preference primary, certify to each supervisor of elections the name of each candidate for political party nomination to be printed on the ballot.
(4) The names ofcandidates for political party nominations for President of the United States shall be printed on official ballots for the presidential preference primary election and shall be marked, counted, canvassed, returned, and proclaimed in the same manner and under the same conditions, so far as they are applicable, as in other state elections. If party rule requires the delegates' names to be printed on the official presidential preference primary ballot, the name of the presidential candidates for that political party may not be printed separately, but the ballot may reflect the presidential candidate to whom the delegate is pledged. If, however, a political party has only one presidential candidate, neither the name of the candidate nor the names ofthe candidate's delegates shall be printed on the ballot.
(5) The state executive committee of each party, by rule adopted at least Jill 120 days prior to the presidential preference primary election, shall determine the number, and establish procedures to be followed in the selection, of delegates and delegate alternates from among each candidate's supporters. A copy of any rule adopted by the executive committee shall be
54 CODING: Words striel<eR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 29 of 45 PageID 254

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Cb. 2011-40

filed with the Department of State within 7 days after its adoption and shall become a public record. The Department of State shall review the procedures and shall notiiy the state executive committee of each political party of any ballot limitations. The Department of State may promulgate rules for the orderly conduct of the presidential preference primary ballot.
(6) Delegates m~<St 'lliali!Y Be late• thai! the seeaBEI FFi<lay iii Ne •emheF ef the ) e&F jlFeee<lffig the jltesi<leBtial jlFefet'eBee jlrimaey iii the maiiiieF I'Feii<le<l B) !'aFt) mle.
(7) All Elelegetes shall be alleeate<l as I'•• ii<led B) jlaFty rule.
{ID\8) All names of candidates or delegates shall be listed as directed by the Department of State.
Section 48. Section 103.141, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
103.141 Removal of county executive committee member for violation of oath.-
fB If Where the county executive committee by at least a two-thirds majority vote of the members of the committee, attending a meeting held after due notice has been given and at which meeting a quorum is present, determines an incumbent county executive committee member i3 w-Ile guilty of an offense involving a violation of the member's oath of office, the saiEI member se •Jielatieg his eF her eath shall be removed from office and the office shall be deemed vacant. PF8videEI; However, if the county committee wrongfully removes a county committee member and the committee member se wrongfully removed files suit in the circuit court alleging his or her removal was wrongful and wins the. saiEI suit, the committee member shall be restored to office and the county committee shall pay the costs incurred by the wrongfully removed committee member in bringing the suit, including reasonable attorney's fees.
(2) f&:~ ellieeF, e<JWlty eeHlftlitteemBII, emmt) eemmittee .. email, jlFeeiBet eemmitteeman, ;preeiBet eammittee., amaB, or member of a eoaaty e:xeeutive eemmittee ffi8) be remeied &em elliee jlHFBtl8IIt tea. 193.161.
Section 49. Section 103 161 Florida Statutes is repealed
Section 50. Section 104.29, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
104.29 Inspectors refusing to allow watchers while ballots are counted.
The inspectors or other election officials at the polling place shall, .!!&!:..thl:
~at all times .. hile the ballets &Fe beillg emmted, allow as many as three persons near to them to see whether the ballots are being =nciled correctly. pea<l an<l ealle<l aBEl the , etes eeFFeetjy tallie<l, 8!18 Any official who denies this privilege or interferes therewith commits is guilty ef a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
55 CODING: Words etrlelren are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

Section 51. Paragraph (b) of subsection (4) of section 105.031, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
105.031 Qualification; filing fee; candidate's oath; items required to be filed.-
(4) CANDIDATE'S OATH.-
(b) All candidates for judicial office shall subscribe to an oath or affirmation in writing to be filed with the appropriate qualifying officer upon qualifying. A printed copy of the oath or affirmation shall be furnished to the candidate by the qualifying officer and shall be in substantially the following form:

State of Florida
County of ......
Before me, an officer authorized to administer oaths, personally appeared ... (please print name as you wish it to appear on the ballot)... , to me well known, who, being sworn, says he or she: is a candidate for the judicial office of ......; that his or her legal residence is ...... County, Florida; that he or she is a qualified elector ofthe state and ofthe territorial jurisdiction ofthe court to which he or she seeks election; that he or she is qualified under the constitution and laws of Florida to hold the judicial office to which he or she desires to be elected or in which he or she desires to be retained; ~
she has taken the eath re'!"ired b) ee. 876.915 876.Hl, Flerida stat..tes; that
he or she has qualified for no other public office in the state, the term ofwhich office or any part thereof runs concurrent to the office he or she seeks; arul that he or she has resigned from any office which he or she is required to resign pursuant to s. 99.012, Florida Statutes· and that he or she will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

...(Signature of candidate)... ... (Address) ...

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ...... day of ......, ...(year)... , at ...... County, Florida.

...(Signature and title of officer administering oath)...
Section 52. Subsection (3), paragraph (b) of subsection (5), subsection (15), and paragraph (c) ofsubsection (16) ofsection 106.011, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
56 CODING: Words stFiekeft are deletions; words~ are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 30 of 45 PageID 255

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

106.011 Definitions.-As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
(3) "Contribution" means:
(a) A gift, subscription, conveyance, deposit, loan, payment, or distribution ofmoney or anything of value, including contributions in kind having an attributable monetary value in any form, made for the purpose of influencing the results of an election or making an electioneering communication.
(b) A transfer offunds between political committees, between committees of continuous existence, between electioneering communications organizations, or between any combination of these groups.
(c) The payment, by any person other than a candidate or political committee, ofcompensation for the personal services of another person which are rendered to a candidate or political committee without charge to the candidate or committee for such services.
(d) The transfer of funds by a campaign treasurer or deputy campaign treasurer between a primary depository and a separate interest-bearing account or certificate ofdeposit, and the term includes any interest earned on such account or certificate.
Notwithstanding the foregoing meanings of "contribution," the term may werd-shall not be construed to include services, including, but not limited to, legal and accounting services, provided without compensation by individuals volunteering a portion or all of their time on behalfof a candidate or political committee. This definition shall nat be eanstrued ta ineiH<le editorial endorsements.
(5)
(b) An expenditure for the purpose ofexpressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate which is made by the national, state, or county executive committee of a political party, including any subordinate committee of a national, state, or county committee of a political party, or by any political committee or committee of continuous existence, or any other person, shall not be considered an independent expenditure if the committee or person:
1. Communicates with the candidate, the candidate's campaign, or an agent of the candidate acting on behalf of the candidate, including any pollster, media consultant, advertising agency, vendor, advisor, or staff member, concerning the preparation of, use of, or payment for, the specific expenditure or advertising campaign at issue; or
2. Makes a payment in cooperation, consultation, or concert with, at the request or suggestion of, or pursuant to any general or particular understanding with the candidate, the candidate's campaign, a political committee
57 CODING: Words striekeR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

supporting the candidate, or an agent ofthe candidate relating to the specific expenditure or advertising campaign at issue; or
3. Makes a payment for the dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of campaign material prepared by the candidate, the candidate's campaign, or an agent of the candidate, including any pollster, media consultant, advertising agency, vendor, advisor, or staff member; or
4. Makes a payment based on information about the candidate's plans, projects, or needs communicated to a member of the committee or person by the candidate or an agent ofthe candidate, provided the committee or person uses the information in any way, in whole or in part, either directly or indirectly, to design, prepare, or pay for the specific expenditure or advertising campaign at issue; or
5. After the last day of the qualifying period prescribed for the candidate for state •'• ide er legislati. e affiee, consults about the candidate's plans, projects, or needs in connection with the candidate's pursuit of election to office and the information is used in any way to plan, create, design, or prepare an independent expenditure or advertising campaign, with:
a. Any officer, director, employee, or agent of a national, state, or county executive committee of a political party that has made or intends to make expenditures in connection with or contributions to the candidate; or
b. Any person whose professional services have been retained by a national, state, or county executive committee of a political party that has made or intends to make expenditures in connection with or contributions to the candidate; or
6. After the last day of the qualifying period prescribed for the candidate foF statewide ar legislati-ve affiee, retains the professional services of any person also providing those services to the candidate in connection with the candidate's pursuit of election to office; or
7. Arranges, coordinates, or directs the expenditure, in any way, with the candidate or an agent of the candidate.
(15) "Unopposed candidate" means a candidate for nomination or election to an office who, after the last day on which any person, including a write-in candidate, may qualifY, is without opposition in the election at which the office is to be filled or who is without such opposition after such date as a result of any primary election or of withdrawal by other candidates seeking the same office. A candidate is not an unopposed candidate if there is a vacancy to be filled under s. 100.111(3) s. 1QQ.ll1(4), if there is a legal proceeding pending regarding the right to a ballot position for the office sought by the candidate, or ifthe candidate is seeking retention as a justice or judge.
58 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 31 of 45 PageID 256

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(16) "Candidate" means any person to whom any one or more of the following apply:
(c) Any person who receives contributions or makes expenditures, or consents for any other person to receive contributions or make expenditures, with a view to bring about his or her nomination or election to, or retention in, public office. However, this definition does not include any candidate for a political party executive committee. ExPenditures related to potential candidate polls as provided ins 106 17 are not contributions or ex;penditures for purposes of this subsection.
Section 53. Subsection (3) of section 106.021, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.021 Campaign treasurers; deputies; primary and secondary depositories.-
(3) No contribution or expenditure, including contributions or expenditures of a candidate or ofthe candidate's family, shall be directly or indirectly made or received in furtherance of the candidacy of any person for nomination or election to political office in the state or on behalf of any political committee except through the duly appointed campaign treasurer of the candidate or political committee, subject .to the following exceptions:
(a) Independent expenditures;
(b) Reimbursements to a candidate or any other individual for expenses incurred in connection with the campaign or activities of the political committee by a check drawn upon the campaign account and reported pursuant to s. 106.07(4). AfteF Jaly 1, 2004, The full name and addFess of each person to whom the candidate or other individual made payment for which reimbursement was made by check drawn upon the campaign account shall be reported pursuant to s. 106.07(4), together with the purpose of such payment;
(c) Expenditures made indirectly through a treasurer for goods or services, such as communications media placement or procurement services, campaign signs, insurance, or other expenditures that include multiple integral components as part of the expenditure and reported pursuant to s. 106.07(4)(a)l3.; or
(d) Expenditures made directly by any political committee or political party regulated by chapter 103 for obtaining time, space, or services in or by any communications medium for the purpose of jointly endorsing three or more candidates, and any such expenditure shall not be considered a contribution or expenditure to or on behalf of any such candidates for the purposes of this chapter.
Section 54. Section 106.022, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.022 Appointment of a registered agent; duties.-
59 CODING: Words &tftekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(1) Each political committee, committee of continuous existence, or electioneering communications organization shall have and continuously maintain in this state a registered office and a registered agent and must file with the filing officer ffivisiaft a statement of appointment for the registered office and registered agent. The statement of appointment must:

(a) Provide the name of the registered agent and the street address and phone number for the registered office;

(b) Identify the entity for whom the registered agent serves;

(c) Designate the address the registered agent wishes to use to receive mail;

(d) Include the entity's undertaking to inform the filing officer ffivisiaft of any change in such designated address;

(e) Provide for the registered agent's acceptance of the appointment, which must confirm that the registered agent is familiar with and accepts the obligations of the position as set forth in this section; and
(f) Contain the signature ofthe registered agent and the entity engaging the registered agent.
(2) An entity may change its appointment of registered agent and registered office under this section by executing a written statement of change and filing it with the filing officer The ·statement must satisfy th-at ideRtifies the 16rmer Fegistered ageRt and Fegistered address aftd also satisfies all of the requirements of subsection (1).

(3) A registered agent may resign his or her appointment as registered agent by executing a written statement of resignation and filing it with the filing officer ffivisiaft. An entity without a registered agent may not make expenditures or accept contributions until it files a written statement of change as required in subsection (2).

Section 55. Subsection (1) of section 106.023, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

106.023 Statement of candidate.-

(1) Each candidate must file a statement with the qualifying officer within 10 days after filing the appointment of campaign treasurer and designation of campaign depository, stating that the candidate has read and understands the requirements of this chapter. Such statement shall be provided by the filing officer and shall be in substantially the following form:
60 CODING: Words stfleken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 32 of 45 PageID 257

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA STATEMENT OF CANDIDATE

Ch. 2011·40

I, ...... , candidate for the office of ......, have been provided access to received, read, and understand the requirements of Chapter 106, Florida Statutes.

...(Signature of candidate)...

... (Date) ...

Willful failure to file this fonn is a violation of ss. 106.19(1)(c) and 106.25(3), F.S.
Section 56. Paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of section 106.025, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.025 Campaign fund raisers.-
(1)
(c) Any tickets or advertising for such a campaign fund raiser~ from the requirements of s. 106.143shall eentaift the fellewing statemeBt: ~e fHuehase afa tieket faF, era eaHtriln:1:tian to, the eampaigH: fand PaiseF is a eefttrilmtieft te the eaml'aiga ef ... (ftame efthe candidate feF whese benefit the eemflaiga fane Paise• is held)....• S>teh tickets sF advertising shall alae eemfll) "ith ethe• flPS .isiens sf this ehaflte• •elating te flelitieal ad •eFtising.
Section 57. Subsection (1) and paragraph (d) of subsection (3) of section 106.03, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
106.03 Registration of political committees and electioneering communications organizations.-
(l)(a) Each political committee that receives antiei}:tates reeeiui:ag contributions or makes making expenditures during a calendar year in an aggregate amount exceeding $500 or that seeks is-seekiBg the signatures of registered electors in support of an initiative shall file a statement of organization as provided in subsection (3) within 10 days after its organization sF, iflate•, .. ithin 10 GQ)S afte• the date"" whieh it has infePPSatien that eauses the eemmittee te antieittate that it 'Nill reeeiYe eentrilmtians ar make e>Ejlendit>tFes in e"eess ef$800. If a political committee is organized within 10 days of any election, it shall immediately file the statement of organization required by this section.
(b)l. Each grQ]!l! eleetieneering eemm>tnieatiens epgani•atien that •e eei. es eentrifHitiens er melEes enpenditmes during a ealendar year in an aggregate ame>tnt e•weeding $8,000 shall file a statement of organization as an electioneering communications organization flPS •illed in BtlBflamgpaflh 2. IJ~ exfledited delioery "ithin 24 hetlFS after its epgaBizatien SF, iflateF, within 24 hours after the date on which it •eeei, es eentrill>ttiens e• makes expenditures for an electioneering communication in excess of $5,000,_jf such expenditures are made within the timeframes specified in s.
61 CODING: Words saiekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 201140

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 201140

106.011(18)(a)2. If the group makes exoenditures for an electioneering communication in excess of $5 000 before the timeframes specified in s. 106.01H18)(a)2. it shall file the statement of organization within 24 hours after the 30th dav before a primary or special primary election or within 24 hours after the 60th day before any other election whichever is applicable.
2.a. In a statewide, legislative, or multicounty election, an electioneering communications organization shall file a statement of organization with the Division of Elections.
b. In a countywide election or any election held on less than a countywide basis, except as described in sub-subparagraph c., an electioneering communications organization shall file a statement of organization with the supervisor of elections of the county in which the election is being held.
c. In a municipal election, an electioneering communications organization shall file a statement of organization with the officer before whom municipal candidates qualifY.
d. Any electioneering communications organization that would be required to file a statement of organization in two or more locations by Pe8fl8ft sf the Sl'gftfli•atieB'B mteBtiSB ts B>lflflS.t SP 8flfl8Be eandidates at state e• Ht>tltiee>tBty aBd leealle\'els efgevemmeBt need only file a statement of organization with the Division of Elections.
(3)
(d) Any political committee which would be required under this subsection to file a statement of organization in two or more locations 8) Peasen af the eemmittee's ifttentieft te SH!lflB.t e• SflflSSe eandidates BF iss>tes at state OF m~:~ltieeun~ and leealle ele efge ePHment need file only with the Division of Elections.
Section 58. Subsection (4) of section 106.04, Florida Statutes, is amended, present subsections (7) and (8) of that section are amended and renumbered as subsections (8) and (9), respectively, and a new subsection (7) is added to that section, to read:
106.04 Committees of continuous existence.-
(4)(a) Each committee of continuous existence shall file an annual report with the Division of Elections during the month of January. Such annual reports shall contain the same information and shall be accompanied by the same materials as original applications filed pursuant to subsection (2). However, the charter or bylaws need not be filed if the annual report is accompanied by a sworn statement by the chair that no changes have been made to such charter or bylaws since the last filing.
(b)l. Each committee of continuous existence shall file regular reports with the Division ofElections at the same times and subject to the same filing conditions as are established by s. 106.07(1) and (2) for candidates' reports. In
62 CODING: Won:ls strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 33 of 45 PageID 258

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

addition when a special election is called to fill a vacancy in office a committee of continuous existence that makes a contribution or expenditure to influence the results of such special election or the precedine: special primarv election must file campaie:n finance reoorts with the filing officer on the dates set by the Department of State pursuant to s. 100.111.
2. Any committee of continuous existence failing to so file a report with the Division of Elections or applicable filine: officer pursuant to this paragraph on the designated due date shall be subject to a fine for late filing as provided by this section.
(c) All committees of continuous existence shall file their reports with the Division of Elections. Reports shall be filed in accordance with s. 106.0705 and shall contain the following information:
1. The full name, address, and occupation of each person who has made one or more contributions, including contributions that represent the payment of membership dues, to the committee during the reporting period, together with the amounts and dates ofsuch contributions. For corporations, the report must provide as clear a description as practicable of the principal type ofbusiness conducted by the corporation. However, ifthe contribution is $100 or Jess, the occupation of the contributor or principal type of business need not be listed. However, for any contributions that represent the payment of dues by members in a fixed amount aggregating no more than $250 per calendar year, pursuant to the schedule on file with the Division of Elections, only the aggregate amount of such contributions need be listed, together with the number of members paying such dues and the amount of the membership dues.
2. The name and address of each political committee or committee of continuous existence from which the reporting committee received, or the name and address of each political committee, committee of continuous existence, or political party to which it made, any transfer of funds, together with the amounts and dates of all transfers.
3. Any other receipt of funds not listed pursuant to subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2., including the sources and amounts of all such funds.
4. The name and address of, and office sought by, each candidate to whom the committee has made a contribution during the reporting period, together with the amount and date of each contribution.
5. The full name and address of each person to whom expenditures have been made by or on behalf of the committee within the reporting period; the amount, date, and purpose of each such expenditure; and the name and address, and office sought by, each candidate on whose behalf such expenditure was made.
6. The full name and addreas of each person to whom an expenditure for personal services, salary, or reimbursement for authorized expenses has
63 CODING: Words stPielren are deletions; words ~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

been made, including the full name and address of each entity to whom the person made payment for which reimbursement was made by check drawn upon the committee account, together with the amount and purpose of such payment.
7. Transaction information from each credit card ~ etatemeRt that "ill be iHeluded iH the Delft report fello 11iHg receipt thereof b) the eammittee. Receipts for each credit card purchase shall be retained by the treasurer with the records for the committee account.
8. The total sum of expenditures made by the committee during the reporting period.
(d) The treasu~er of each committee shall certify as to the correctness of each report and sha\1 bear the responsibility for its accuracy and veracity. Any treasurer who willfully certifies to the correctness of a report while knowing that such report is incorrect, false, or incomplete commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(7) Any change in information previously submitted to the division shall be reported within 10 davs following the change
{8}('fj If a committee of continuous existence ceases to meet the criteria prescribed by subsection (1), the Division of Elections shall revoke its certification UHtil sueb. time as the eriteria are again met. The Division of
Elections shall.!!d!mt p•amulgate rules to prescribe the manner in which th!!
5Heft certification of a committee of continuous existence shall be revoked. Such rules shall, at a minimum, provide for:
(a) Notice, which must shall contain the facts and conduct that warrant the intended action.
(b) Adequate opportunity to respond.
(c) Appeal of the decision to the Florida Elections Commission. Such appeals Jim sb.aJl.-be exempt from the confidentiality provisions of s. 106.25.
ffilt8l(a) Any committee of continuous existence failing to file a report on the designated due date ill sb.ftll.be subject to a fine. The fine shall be $50 per day for the first 3 days late and, thereafter, $500 per day for each late day, not to exceed 25 percent of the total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report. However for the reports immediately nreceding each primary and general election including a special primary election and a special general election the fine shall be $500 per day for each late da,y, not to exceed 25 percent ofthe total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater for the period covered by the late report, The fine shall be assessed by the filing officer, and the moneys collected shall be deposited .i.nt2;
64 CODING: Words striekeH. are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 34 of 45 PageID 259

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

L ffi The General Revenue Fund. in the case of fmes collected by the Division of Elections.
2. The general revenue fund of the political subdivision in the case of fines collected by a county or municipal filing officer. No separate fine shall be assessed for failure to file a copy of any report required by this section.
(b) Upon determining that a report is late, the filing officer shall immediately notify the treasurer of the committee or the committee's registered agent as to the failure to file a report by the designated due date and that a fine is being assessed for each late day. Upon receipt of the report, the filing officer shall determine the amount of fine which is due and shall notifY the treasurer of the committee. Notice is deemed complete upon proof of deliverv of written notice to the mailing or street address on record with the filing officer. The filing officer shall determine the amount of the fine due based upon the earliest of the following:
1. When the report is actually received by such officer.
2. When the report is postmarked.
3. When the certificate of mailing is dated.
4. When the receipt from an established courier company is dated.
Such fine shall be paid to the filing officer within 20 days after receipt of the notice of payment due, unless appeal is made to the Florida Elections Commission pursuant to paragraph (c). An officer or member of a committee il! ehall not he personally liable for such fine.
(c) Any treasurer of a committee may appeal or dispute the fine, based upon unusual circumstances surrounding the failure to file on the designated due date, and may request and il! sftall.-be entitled to a hearing before the Florida Elections Commission, which !lli!X shall ha, e the autherit) te waive the fine in whole or in part. Any such request must ehall be made within 20 days after receipt of the notice of payment due. Ia such case, the tFeasu•er ef The committee shall file the appeal with , within the 2f) d~ pe•ied, aetify the liliag elliccF ia writiag ef his •• he• iateatiea te llriHg the matter before the commission with a copy provided to the filing officer.
(d) The filing officer shall notifY the Florida Elections Commission of the repeated late filing by a committee of continuous existence, the failure of a committee ofcontinuous existence to file a report after notice, or the failure to pay the fine imposed.
Section 59. Section 106.07, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.07 Reports; certification and filing.-
(1) Each campaign treasurer designated by a candidate or political committee pursuant to s. 106.021 shall file regular reports of all
65 CODING: Words stFiekeR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

contributions received, and all expenditures made, by or on behalf of such candidate or political committee. Except for the third calendar quarter immediately preceding a general election reports shall be filed on the lOth day following the end of each calendar quarter from the time the campaign treasurer is appointed, except that, if the lOth day following the end of a calendar quarter occurs on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the report shall be filed on the next following day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. Quarterly reports shall include all contributions received and expenditures made during the calendar quarter which have not otherwise been reported pursuant to this section.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), folle.dag the last a~ ef <jlllllifying-foHJlliee, the reports shall also be filed on the 32nd, 18th, and 4th days immediately preceding the primary and on the 46th, 32nd, 18th, and 4th days immediately preceding the election, for a candidate who is opposed in seeking nomination or election to any office, for a political committee, or for a committee of continuous existence.
(b) Fellewiag the last aa) efEJualifylagfo• ellice, Any statewide candidate who has requested to receive contributions pursuant to from the .EI!u:ida Election Campaign Financing Act Trest Flifta or any statewide candidate in a race with a candidate who has requested to receive contributions pursuant 12 from the m:l; ~ shalll!!§l! file reports on the 4th, 11th, 18th, 25th, and 32nd days prior to the primary election, and on the 4th, 11th, 18th, 25th, 32nd, 39th, 46th, and 53rd days prior to the general election.
(c) Following the last day of qualifying for office, any unopposed candidate need only file a report within 90 days after the date such candidate became unopposed. Such report shall contain all previously unreported contributions and expenditures as required by this section and shall reflect disposition of funds as required by a. 106.141.
(d)l. When a special election is called to fill a vacancy in office, all political committees aHa committees sf ceatiaueus "'dsteace making con-
tributions or expenditures to influence the results of such special election m:
the preceding special primary election shall file campaign treasurers' reports with the filing officer on the dates set by the Department ofState pursuant to s. 100.111.
2. When an election is called for an issue to appear on the ballot at a time when no candidates are scheduled to appear on the ballot, all political committees making contributions or expenditures in support of or in opposition to such issue shall file reports on the 18th and 4th days prior to such election.
(e) The filing officer shall provide each candidate with a schedule designating the beginning and end of reporting periods as well as the corresponding designated due dates.
66 CODING: Words stFiekeR are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 35 of 45 PageID 260

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(2)(a)l. All reports required of a candidate by this section shall be filed with the officer before whom the candidate is required by law to qualify. All candidates who file with the Department of State shall file their reports pursuant to s. 106.0705. Except as provided in s. 106.0705, reports shall be filed not later than 5 p.m. of the day designated; however, any report postmarked by the United States Postal Service no later than midnight of the day designated shall be deemed to have been filed in a timely manner. Any report received by the filing officer within 5 days after the designated due date that was delivered by the United States Postal Service shall be deemed timely filed unless it has a postmark that indicates that the report was mailed after the designated due date. A certificate of mailing obtained from and dated by the United States Postal Service at the time of mailing, or a receipt from an established courier company, which bears a date on or before the date on which the report is due, shall be proof of mailing in a timely manner. Reports shall contain information of all previously unreported contributions received and expenditures m'ade as of the preceding Friday, except that the report filed on the Friday immediately preceding tbe election shall contain information of all previously unreported contributions received and expenditures made as of the day preceding that designated due date. All such reports shall be open to public inspection.
2. This subsection does not prohibit the governing body of a political subdivision, by ordinance or resolution, from imposing upon its own officers and candidates electronic filing requirements not in conflict with s. 106.0705. Expenditure of public funds for such purpose is deemed to be for a valid public purpose.
(b)l. Any report tlli!t wiHeh is deemed to be incomplete by the officer with whom the candidate qualifies shall be accepted on a conditional basis.,......t The campaign treasurer shall be notified by ~ registered maill!L.l!)'
another method usini a common carrier that provides a proof of deliyezy of ~ as to why the report is incomplete and :withiiL71le-giveft-a days after ffem receipt of such notice !!lJ.!§i t& file an addendum to the report providing all information necessary to complete the report in compliance with this section. Failure to file a complete report after such notice constitutes a violation of this chapter.
2. Notice is deemed complete upon proofofdeliyerv of a written notice to the mailing or street address ofthe campai~ treasurer or registered agent of record with the ffiing officer Ia lie>> ef the aetiee by registered mail as reljaired in stibjlBI'Bgl'ajlh l., the ljHalifyiag eflieer mBj aetif:, the eamjlaig» treae tH'er by teiejlheae that the rejlert is iaeemjliete aad reljHest the infermatiea aeeessaey te eeffijliete the Fejlert. If, he h'e, er, SlieR infermatiea is aet reeei. ed b~ the ljHalifyiag eflieer .tithin 3 da~ s after the telejlfteae Feljliest therefer, aetiee shall he seat ~ registered mail ae jlre.ided ia BHbjlaragrajlh l.
(3) Reports required of a political committee shall be filed with the agency or officer before whom such committee registers pursuant to s. 106.03(3) and shall be subject to the same filing conditions as established for
67 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

candidates' reports. Incomplete reports by political committees shall be treated in the manner provided for incomplete reports by candidates in subsection (2).
(4)(a) Each report required by this section !!lJ.!§i sftaD contain:
1. The full name, address, and occupation, if any of each person who has made one or more contributions to or for such committee or candidate within the reporting period, together with the amount and date of such contributions. For corporations, the report must provide as clear a description as practicable of the principal type of business conducted by the corporation. However, if the contribution is $100 or less or is from a relative, as defined in s. 112.312, provided that the relationship is reported, the occupation of the contributor or the principal type of business need not be listed.
2. The name and address of each political committee from which the reporting committee or the candidate received, or to which the reporting committee or candidate made, any transfer of funds, together with the amounts and dates of all transfers.
3. Each loan for campaign purposes to or from any person or political committee within the reporting period, together with the full names, addresses, and occupations, and principal places of business, if any, of the lender and endorsers, if any, and the date and amount of such loans.
4. A statement of each contribution, rebate, refund, or other receipt not otherwise listed under subparagraphs 1. through 3.
5. The total sums of all loans, in-kind contributions, and other receipts by or for such committee or candidate during the reporting period. The reporting forms shall be designed to elicit separate totals for in-kind contributions, loans, and other receipts.
6. The full name and address of each person to whom expenditures have been made by or on behalfofthe committee or candidate within the reporting period; the amount, date, and purpose of each such expenditure; and the name and address of, and office sought by, each candidate on whose behalf such expenditure was made. However, expenditures made from the petty cash fund provided by s. 106.12 need not be reported individually.
7. The full name and address of each person to whom an expenditure for personal services, salary, or reimbursement for authorized expenses as provided ins. 106.021(3) has been made and which is not otherwise reported, including the amount, date, and purpose of such expenditure. However, expenditures made from the petty cash fund provided for ins. 106.12 need not be reported individually. Receipts for reimbursement for authorized expenditures shall be retained by the treasurer along with the records for the campaign account.
8. The total amount withdrawn and the total amount spent for petty cash purposes pursuant to this chapter during the reporting period.
68 CODING: Words stFiekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 36 of 45 PageID 261

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

9. The total sum of expenditures made by such committee or candidate during the reporting period.
10. The amount and nature of debts and obligations owed by or to the committee or candidate, which relate to the conduct of any political campaign.
11. Transaction information for each credit card purchase. II. espy afeaeh coedit eard statement .. hieh shall be ineladed in the neJ<t repart fella .. ing reeeipt thereaf by the eandidate BF pelitieal eemmittee. Receipts for each credit card purchase shall be retained by the treasurer with the records for the campaign account.
12. The amount and nature of any separate interest-bearing accounts or certificates of deposit and identification of the financial institution in which such accounts or certificates of deposit are located.
13. The primary purposes of an expenditure made indirectly through a campaign treasurer pursuant to s. 106.021(3) for goods and services such as communications media placement or procurement setvices, campaign signs, insurance, and other expenditures that include multiple components as part of the expenditure. The primary purpose of an expenditure shall be that purpose, including integral and directly related components, that comprises 80 percent of such expenditure.
(b) The filing officer shall make available to any candidate or committee a reporting form which the candidate or committee may use to indicate contributions received by the candidate or committee but returned to the contributor before deposit.
(5) The candidate and his or her campaign treasurer, in the case of a candidate, or the political committee chair and campaign treasurer of the committee, in the case of a political committee, shall certify as to the correctness of each report; and each person so certifying shall bear the responsibility for the accuracy and veracity of each report. Any campaign treasurer, candidate, or political committee chair who willfully certifies the correctness of any report while knowing that such report is incorrect, false, or incomplete commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(6) The eampaign depositary shall FetarH all eheel<s !Ira'"' an the aeeeant ta the eampaign treas ~•e• "he shall retaiH the reea•ds paFsaOHt ta s. HlEHlS. The records maintained by the campaign depository with respect to .!!!!X campaign account regulated by this chapter are s11eh aeeermt shall be subject to inspection by an agent of the Division of Elections or the Florida Elections Commission at any time during normal banking hours, and such depository shall furnish certified copies ofany ofsuch records to the Division of Elections or Florida Elections Commission upon request.
69 CODING: Words s-tfieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

(7) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, in any reporting period during which a candidate, political committee, or committee of continuous existence has not received funds, made any contributions, or expended any reportable funds, the filing of the required report for that period is waived. However, the next report filed must specify that the report covers the entire period between the last submitted report and the report being filed, and any candidate, political committee, or committee of continuous existence not reporting by virtue of this subsection on dates prescribed elsewhere in this chapter shall notify the filing officer in writing on the prescribed reporting date that no report is being filed on that date.
(8)(a) Any candidate or political committee failing to file a report on the designated due date .i§ shall-be subject to a fine as provided in paragraph (b) for each late day, and, in the case of a candidate, such fine shall be paid only from personal funds ofthe candidate. The fine shall be assessed by the filing officer and the moneys collected shall be deposited:
1. In the General Revenue Fund, in the case of a candidate for state office or a political committee that registers with the Division of Elections; or
2. In the general revenue fund ofthe political subdivision, in the case of a candidate for an office of a political subdivision or a political committee that registers with an officer of a political subdivision.
No separate fme shall be assessed for failure to file a copy of any report required by this section.
(b) Upon determining that a report is late, the filing officer shall immediately notify the candidate or chair of the political committee as to the failure to file a report by the designated due date and that a fme is being assessed for each late day. The fine shall be $50 per day for the first 3 days late and, thereafter, $500 per day for each late day, not to exceed 25 percent of the total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report. However, for the reports immediately preceding each special primacy election special election primary~ and general election, the fine shall be $500 per day for each late day, not to exceed 25 percent of the total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report. For reports required under s. 106.141(7), the fine is $50 per day for each late day, not to exceed 25 percent of the total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report. Upon receipt of the report, the filing officer shall determine the amount of the fine which is due and shall notify the candidate or chair m: recistered agent of the political committee. Tbe filing officer shall determine the amount of the fine due based upon the earliest of the following:
1. When the report is actually received by such officer.
2. When the report is postmarked.
3. When the certificate of mailing is dated.
70 CODING: Words stReken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 37 of 45 PageID 262

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

4. When the receipt from an established courier company is dated.
5. When the electronic receipt issued pursuant to s. 106.0705 or other electronic filing system authorized in this section is dated.
Such fine shall be paid to the filing officer within 20 days after receipt of the notice of payment due, unless appeal is made to the Florida Elections Commission pursuant to paragraph (c). Notice is deemed complete upon oroof of delivery of written notice to the mailing or street address on record with the filing officer In the case of a candidate, such fine shall not be an allowable campaign expenditure and shall be paid only from personal funds of the candidate. An officer or member of a political committee shall not be personally liable for such fine.
(c) Any candidate or chair of a political committee may appeal or dispute the fine, based upon, but not limited to, unusual circumstances surrounding the failure to file on the designated due date, and may request and shall be entitled to a hearing before the Florida Elections Commission, which shall have the authority to waive the fine in whole or in part. The Florida Elections Commission must consider the mitigating and aggravating circumstances contained ins. 106.265(1) when determining the amount ofa fine, ifany, to be waived. Any such request shall be made within 20 days after receipt of the notice of payment due. In such case, the candidate or chair of the political committee shall, within the 20-day period, notifY the filing officer in writing of his or her intention to bring the matter before the commission.
(d) The appropriate filing officer shall notifY the Florida Elections Commission ofthe repeated late filing by a candidate or political committee, the failure ofa candidate or political committee to file a report after notice, or the failure to pay the fine imposed. The commission shall investigate only those alleged late filing violations specifically identified by the filing officer and as set forth in the notification. Any other alleged violations must be separately stated and reported by the division to the commission under s. 106.25(2).
(9) The Department of State may prescribe by rule the requirements for filing campaign treasurers' reports as set forth in this chapter.
Section 60. Subsections (8) and (9) of section 106.0703, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
106.0703 Electioneering communications organizations; reporting requirements; certification and filing; penalties.-
{8) AB eleetianeeriHg eammHHieatiaas argORi~atian shall, withiH 2 days after reeei •iag its imtialpass,, ard or secure sigH on from the llepartmeat of State allowiag eoalidefttial aeeess to the department's eleetraaie C8ffijl8igH BHORee filiHg ~stem, eleetreHieally file the periallie reports that .. auld have beeR re<j>Hred piH'BilORt te this section far reportable activities that eeCilrred siaee the date of the last geaeral eleetiaa.
71 CODING: Words stPielreft are deletions; words ~ are additions.

Ch. 201140

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

{8){9} Electioneering communications organizations shall not use credit cards.
Section 61. Paragraphs (a) and (c) of subsection (2) and subsections (3) and (7) of section 106.0705, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
106.0705 Electronic filing of campaign treasurer's reports.-
(2)(a) Each individual eaadi<late who is required to file reports with the .diYi!illm pursuant to s. 106.07 or s 106 141 oiith the diiisiaR must file such reports with the di, isiaa by means of the division's electronic filing system.
(c) Each person or organization that is required to file reports with the division under s. 106.071 must file such reports "ith the di. isiaR by means of the division's electronic filing system.
(3) Reports filed pursuant to this section shall be completed and filed through the electronic filing system not later than midnight of the day designated. Reports not filed by midnight ofthe day designated are late filed and are subject to the penalties under s 106 04(9) s. Hl6.Q4{8), s. 106.07(8), s. 106.0703(7), or s. 106.29(3), as applicable.
{7) ~lot ,fitftstORding anything iR law to the contrary, aay report re!j\lired to ha, e heeR liled URder this seetiaa far the period ended :March 31, 2QQii, shall be deemed to ha, e beeR time!:; liled if the report is liled uader this seeties ea BF Befe:f'e JHfte 1, 2QQ6.
Section 62. Subsections (3) and (6) ofsection 106.08, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
106.08 Contributions; limitations on.-
(3)(a) Any contribution received by a candidate with opposition in an election or by the campaign treasurer or a deputy campaign treasurer ofsuch a candidate on the day of that election or less than 5 days prior to the day of that election must be returned by him or her to the person or committee contributing it and may not be used or expended by or on behalf of the candidate.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c), any contribution received by a candidate or by the campaign treasurer or a deputy campaign treasurer of a candidate after the date at which the candidate withdraws his or her candidacy, or after the date the candidate is defeated, becomes unopposed, or is elected to office must be returned to the person or committee contributing it and may not be used or expended by or on behalf of the candidate.
{e) 'Ncith respect to 8HY eampaig» far BH oftiee iR which 8ft independent or miaar party eBHdidate has liled as re<juired ia s. 99.Q91iii ar s. 99.{)96, but •...<Rase qualifieatioa is peading a determination by the Department efStste er
72 CODING: Words stFielreB are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 38 of 45 PageID 263

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

S!iflen•is9l' af e!eetians as ta Y<lletheF 9F nat the Felj!iired n!imher effletitian signat!iFeS 'NBS aatained:
1. The department ... 8!ijleM80F shall, no late• than a daj 8 alteF that
dete.minatian has been made, notify in miting all other candidates fer that olfiee of that determination.
2. Any eontria!itian Feeei'led by a eandidate o• the eampaign tFeasm-er o• dep!ity campaign tFeas!iFeF of a eandidate alter the eaadidate has been notified in "riting By the department OF 8!ipeM80F that he OF she has aeeome !iBopposed as a res!ilt of aa iadependent OF minoF paFty eandidate failiag to obtaia the FeljHiFed n!imheF of petition signat...es shall be Fet ..med to the ~1-itieal eemmittee, er eammittee ef eeHtin11eus existenee eentribming it and shall not be !ised OF elfjlended B) BF an behalf of the elllldidate.
(6)(a) A political party may not accept any contribution that has been specifically designated for the partial or exclusive use of a particular candidate. Any contribution so designated must be returned to the contributor and may not be used or expended by or on behalfofthe candidate.
(b)l. A political party may not accept any in-kind contribution that fails to provide a direct benefit to the political party. A "direct benefit" includes, but is not limited to, fundraising or furthering the objectives of the political party.
2.a. An in-kind contribution to a state political party may be accepted only by the chairperson of the state political party or by the chairperson's designee or designees whose names are on file with the division in a form acceptable to the division prior to the date of the written notice required in sub-subparagraph b. An in-kind contribution to a county political party may be accepted only by the chairperson of the county political party or by the county chairperson's designee or designees whose names are on file with the supervisor of elections ofthe respective county prior to the date ofthe written notice required in sub-subparagraph b.
b. A person making an in-kind contribution to a state political party or county political party must provide prior written notice of the contribution to a person described in sub-subparagraph a. The prior written notice must be signed and dated and may be provided by an electronic or facsimile message. However, prior written notice is not required for an in-kind contribution that consists offood and beverage in an aggregate amount not exceeding $1,500 which is consumed at a single sitting or event if such in-kind contribution is accepted in advance by a person specified in sub-subparagraph a.
c. A person described in sub-subparagraph a. may accept an in-kind contribution requiring prior written notice only in a writing that is signed and dated before the in-kind contribution is made. Failure to obtain the required written acceptance of an in-kind contribution to a state or county political party constitutes a refusal of the contribution.
73 CODING: Words strieknn are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

d. A copy of each prior written acceptance required under sub-subparagraph c. must be filed with the di. i8ion at the time the regular reports of contributions and expenditures required under 8. 106.29 are filed by the state executive committee and county executive committee. A state executive committee and an affiliated narty committee must file with the division. A county executive committee must file with the county's supervisor of elections.
e. An in-kind contribution may not be given to a state or county political party unless the in-kind contribution is made as provided in this subparagraph.
Section 63. Section 106.09, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.09 Cash contributions and contribution by cashier's checks.-
(l)il!.) A person may not make an aggregate eF aeee!lt a cash contribution or contribution by means of a cashier's check to the same candidate or committee in excess of $50 per election.
(b) A person may not accept an awegate cash contribution or contribution by means of a cashier's check from the same contributor in excess of $50 per election.
(2)(a) Any person who makes or accepts a contribution in eJ<eeSs-el"$50 in violation of subsection (1) this seetion commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(b) Any person who knowingly and willfully makes or accepts a contribution in excess of $5,000 in violation of subsection (1) this seetion commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided ins. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Section 64. Paragraph (b) of subsection (1) and paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 106.11, Florida Statutes, are amended, and subsection (6) is added to that section, to read:
106.11 Expenses of and expenditures by candidates and political committees.-Each candidate and each political committee which designates a primary campaign depository pursuant to s. 106.021(1) shall make expenditures from funds on deposit in such primary campaign depository only in the following manner, with the exception of expenditures made from petty cash funds provided by s. 106.12:
(1)

(b) The checks for such account shall contain, as a minimum, the following information:
1. The statement "Campaign Aeeo!iflt ef ...(name of candidate or political committee)... Campaign Account."
74 CODING: Words otrieken sre deletions; words underlined sre additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 39 of 45 PageID 264

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

2. The account number and the name of the bank.
3. The exact amount of the expenditure.
4. The signature of the campaign treasurer or deputy treasurer.
5. The exact purpose for which the expenditure is authorized.
6. The name of the payee.
(2)(a) For purposes of this section, debit cards are considered bank checks, if:
1. Debit cards are obtained from the same bank that has been designated as the candidate's or political committee's primary campaign depository.
2. Debit cards are issued in the name of the treasurer, deputy treasurer, or authorized user and state "CampaigB f,eealiat af ...(name of candidate or political committee)... Campai1m Account.•
3. No more than three debit cards are requested and issued.
4. BefOre a debit card is used, a list af all pers91>S autharioed ta use the card is Bled ,,;th the di>.·isiaa.
a. 1\JI debit cards issued ta a candidate's eampaiga aP a palitieal
committee e!lflire aa later thaa millaight af the last day af the maath af the general eleetiaa.
1,.6. The person using the debit card does not receive cash as part of, or independent of, any transaction for goods or services.
li,1-. All receipts for debit card transactions contain:
a. The last four digits of the debit card number.
b. The exact amount of the expenditure.
c. The name of the payee.
d. The signature of the campaign treasurer, deputy treasurer, or authorized user.
e. The exact purpose for which the expenditure is authorized.
Any information required by this subparagraph but not included on the debit card transaction receipt may be handwritten on, or attached to, the receipt by the authorized user before submission to the treasurer.
(6) A candidate who makes a loan to his or her campaien and reoorts the Joan as required by s. 106.07 may be reimbursed for the Joan at any time the campai1m account has sufficient funds to repay the loan and satisfv its other obligations
75 CODING: Words &tPiekeft are deletions; words ~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

Section 65. Subsection (4) of section 106.141, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.141 Disposition of surplus funds by candidates.-
(4)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), any candidate required to dispose offunds pursuant to this section shaH, at the option ofthe candidate, dispose of such funds by any of the following means, or any combination thereof:
1. Return pro rata to each contributor the funds that have not been spent or obligated.
2. Donate the funds that have not been spent or obligated to a charitable organization or organizations that meet the qualifications of s. 50l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
3. Give nat mare than $Hl,!l!l!l af the funds that have not been spent or obligated to the political party of which such candidate is a member;-C'<CCjlt that a eaallidate fOp the Florida Senate m~ry gi 'e nat mare thaa $2Q,QQQ af such flrnds ta the palitieal pa~ af which the eaadidate is a member.
4. Give the funds that have not been spent or obligated:
a. In the case of a candidate for state office, to the state, to be deposited in either the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund or the General Revenue Fund, as designated by the candidate; or
b. In the case of a candidate for an office ofa political subdivision, to such political subdivision, to be deposited in the general fund thereof.
(b) Any candidate required to dispose of funds pursuant to this section who has received contributions pursuant to ffflm the Florida Election Campaign Financing Act Trost FHad shall after aU monetary commitments pursuant to s 106.1H5l(bl and (c) have been met return aU surplus campaign funds to the General Revenue Eleetiaa Campaiga Finaaeiag Trust Fund.
Section 66. Section 106.143, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.143 Political advertisements circulated prior to election; require· menta.-
(l)(a) Any political advertisement that is paid for by a candidate except a write-in candidate, and that is published, displayed, or circulated before, or on the day of, any election must prominently state:
1. "Political advertisement paid for and approved by ...(name of candidate)... , ...(party affiliation)... , for ... (office sought).. ."; or
2. "Paid by ... (name of candidate) ... , ...(party affiliation)... , for ...(office sought) ...."
76 CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 40 of 45 PageID 265

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch.2011·40

(b) Any political advertisement that is paid for by a write-in candidate and that is published displayed. or circulated before. or on the day of. any election must prominently state:
1. "Political advertisement paid for and approved by ... (name of candidate) .... write-in candidate for ...(office sought).. ."· or
2. "Paid by ...(name of candidate)... write-in candidate. for ...(office soughtl...."
(£)\bl Any other political advertisement published, displayed, or circulated before, or on the day of, any election must prominently:
1. Be marked "paid political advertisement" or with the abbreviation "pd. pol. adv."
2. State the name and address of the persons paying for sponsoring the advertisement.
3.a.fl} State whether the advertisement and the cost ofproduction is paid for or provided in kind by or at the expense of the entity publishing, displaying, broadcasting, or circulating the political advertisement.t-<>r
(II) State who provided er paid for the advertisement and east ef predHetien, if dilferent fl'em the solifee of sponsorship.
b. Tbis Slieparagraph does net appl) if the soHree of the spenssrship is patent!) elear frem the eentent er format ef the pelitieal advertisement.
1dJ{el Any political advertisement made pursuant to s.l06.021(3)(d) must Be marke8 "paid pelitieal ad, eAisemeHt" BF ..ith the aBBFe •iatiea "tnl. flBl. ad,." aad muat prominently state the name and address of the political committee or political party paying for the advertisement., "Paiel feF and
spensered ey ...(name ef person paying for pelitieal advertisement)....
f<Jlpra, ed B) ... (names sf persons, party aftiHation, and effiees seHght in the pelitieal ad·, ertisement)... ."
(2) Political advertisements made as in-kind contributions from a political party must prominently state: "Paid political advertisement paid for by in-kind by... (name of political party).... Approved by ...(name of person party affiliation and office sought in the political advertisement) ,."
fQ1f2J Any political advertisement of a candidate running for partisan office shall express the name of the political party of which the candidate is seeking nomination or is the nominee. If the candidate for partisan office is running as a candidate with no party affiliation, any political advertisement of the candidate must state that the candidate has no party affiliation. A political advertisement of a candidate running for nonpartisan office may not state the candidate'sJ1olitical party aff.!liation. This section do_e§_ng_t_prnhibit a political advertisement from stating the candidate's partisan-related
77
CODING: Words atrieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

experience. A candidate for nonpartisan office is prohibited from campaigning based on party affiliation.
IDa.) It is unlawful for any candidate or person on behalf of a candidate to represent that any person or organization supports such candidate, unless the person or organization so represented has given specific approval in writing to the candidate to make such representation. However, this subsection does not apply to:
(a) Editorial endorsement by any newspaper, radio or television station, or other recognized news medium.
(b) Publication by a party committee advocating the candidacy of its nominees.
{lill4J(a) Any political advertisement not paid for by a candidate, including those paid for by a political party, other than an independent expenditure, offered l!y-M on behalf of a candidate must be approved in advance by the candidate. Such political advertisement must expressly state that the content ofthe advertisement was approved by the candidate unless the political advertisement is published displayed or circulated in compliance with subparagraph (l)(a)2.. and must state who paid for the advertisement. The candidate shall provide a written statement of authorization to the newspaper, radio station, television station, or other medium for each such advertisement submitted for publication, display, broadcast, or other distribution.
(b) Any person who makes an independent expenditure for a political advertisement shall provide a written statement that no candidate has approved the advertisement to the newspaper, radio station, television station, or other medium for each such advertisement submitted for publication, display, broadcast, or other distribution. The advertisement must also contain a statement that no candidate has approved the advertisement.
(e) This sHbseetian daes aat appl) te eamjlaign messages Hsed B) a eandidate and his ar her Slippal'ters if these messages are designed ta be "em b) a persen.
{IDfiH No political advertisement of a candidate who is not an incumbent of the office for which the candidate is running shall use the word "re-elect." Additionally, such advertisement must include the word "for" between the candidate's name and the office for which the candidate is running, in order that incumbency is not implied. This subsection does not apply to bumper stickers or items designed to be worn by a person.
(7) Political advertisements paid for by a political party or an affiliated party committee may use names and abbreviations as registered under s. 103.081 in the disclaimer.
78
CODING: Words atrieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 41 of 45 PageID 266

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011·40

fiD(G) Thls section does not apply to novelty items having a retail value of $10 or less which support, but do not oppose, a candidate or issue.
~ Any political advertisement which is published, displayed, or produced in a language other than English may provide the information required by this section in the language used in the advertisement.
@X8J This section does not apply to any campaigu message or political advertisement used by a candidate and the candidate's supporters or by a political committee if the message or advertisement is:
(a) Desigued to be worn by a person.
(b) Placed as a paid link on an Internet website, provided the message or advertisement is no more than 200 characters in length and the link directs the user to another Internet website that complies with subsection (1).
(c) Placed as a graphic or picture link where compliance with the requirements of this section is not reasonably practical due to the size of the graphic or picture link and the link directs the user to another Internet website that complies with subsection (1).
(d) Placed at no cost on an Internet website for which there is no cost to post content for public users.
(e) Placed or distributed on an unpaid profile or account which is available to the public without charge or on a social networking Internet website, as long as the source of the message or advertisement is patently clear from the content or format of the message or advertisement. A candidate or political committee may prominently display a statement indicating that the website or account is an official website or account of the candidate or political committee and is approved by the candidate or political committee. A website or account may not be marked as official without prior approval by the candidate or political committee.
(f) Distributed as a text message or other message via Short Message Service, provided the message is no more than 200 characters in length or requires the recipient to sigu up or opt in to receive it.
(g) Connected with or included in any software application or accompanying function, provided that the user sigus up, opts in, downloads, or otherwise accesses the application from or through a website that complies with subsection (1).
(h) Sent by a third-party user from or through a campaigu or committee's website, provided the website complies with subsection (1).
(i) Contained in or distributed through any other technology-related item, service, or device for which compliance with subsection (1) is not reasonably practical due to the size or nature of such item, service, or device
79 CODING: Wordsllirielteft sre deletions; words underlined sre additions.

Ch. 201140

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 201140

as available, or the means ofdisplaying the message or advertisement makes compliance with subsection (1) impracticable.
fl1)(9) Any person who willfully violates any provision of this section is subject to the civil penalties prescribed in s. 106.265.
Section 67. Section 106.1437, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.1437 Miscellaneous advertisements.-Any advertisement, other than a political advertisement, independent expenditure, or electioneering communication, on billboards, bumper stickers, radio, or television, or in a newspaper, a magazine, or a periodical, intended to influence public policy or the vote of a public official, shall clearly desiguate the sponsor of such advertisement by including a clearly readable statement of sponsorship. If the advertisement is broadcast on television, the advertisement shall also contain a verbal statement of sponsorship. This section d!!!m shall not apply to an editorial endorsement. For purposes of this chapter an expenditure made for or in furtherance of. a miscellaneous advertisement is not considered to be a contribution to or on behalf of a candidate and does not constitute an independent expenditure Such expenditures are not subject to the limitations applicable to indeoondent expenditures.
Section 68. Section 106.17, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.17 Polls and surveys relating to candidacies.-Any candidate, political committee, committee of continuous existence, electioneering commnnication organization, or state or county executive committee of a political party may authorize or conduct a political poll, survey, index, or measurement ofany kind relating to candidacy for public office so long as the candidate, political committee, committee of continuous existence, electioneering communication organization, or political party maintains complete jurisdiction over the poll in all its aspects. State and county executive committees of a political party or an affiliated party committee may authorize and conduct political polls for the purpose of determining the viability of potential candidates. Such poll results mav be shared with potential candidates and expenditures incurred by state and county executive committees or an affiliated party committee for potential candidate polls are not contributions to the potential candidates.
Section 69. Subsection (4) is added to section 106.19, Florida Statutes, to read:
106.19 Violations by candidates, persons connected with campaigns, and political committees.-
(4) Except as otherwise expressly stated the failure by a candidate to comply with the requirements of this chapter has no effect UP9n whether the candidate has qualified for the office the candidate is seeking.
Section 70. Subsections (2) and (3), paragraph (i) of subsection (4), and subsection (5) of section 106.25, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
80 CODING: Words stPieken are deletions; words~ are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 42 of 45 PageID 267

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

106.25 Reports of alleged violations to Florida Elections Commission; disposition of findings.-
(2) The commission shall investigate all violations of this chapter and chapter 104, but only after having received either a sworn complaint or information reported to it under this subsection by the Division of Elections. Such sworn complaint must be based upon personal information or information other than hearsay. Any person, other than the division, having information of any violation of this chapter or chapter 104 shall file a sworn complaint with the commission. The commission shall investigate only those alleged violations specifically contained within the sworn complaint. If any complainant fails to allege all violations that arise from the facts or allegations alleged in a complaint, the commission shall be barred from investigating a subsequent complaint from such complainant that is based upon such facts or allegations that were raised or could have been raised in the first complaint. If the complaint includes allegations of violations relating to expense items reimbursed by a candidate, committee, or organization to the campaign account before a sworn complaint is filed, the commission shall be barred from investigating such allegations. Such sworn complaint shall state whether a complaint of the same violation has been made to any state attorney. Within 5 days after receipt of a sworn complaint, the commission shall transmit a copy of the complaint to the alleged violator. The resoondent shall have 14 days after receiot of the complaint to file an initial response and the executive director may not determine the legal sufficiency of the complaint during that time period. If the executive director finds that the complaint is legally sufficient, the respondent shall be notified of such finding by letter, which sets forth the statutory provisions alleged to have been violated and the alleged factual basis that supports the finding. All sworn complaints alleging violations of the Florida Election Code over which the commission has jurisdiction shall be filed with the commission within 2 years after the alleged violations. The period of limitations is tolled on the day a sworn complaint is filed with the commission. The complainant may withdraw the sworn complaint at any time prior to a probable cause hearing if good cause is shown. Withdrawal shall be requested in writing, signed by the complainant, and witnessed by a notary public, stating the facts and circumstances constituting good cause. The executive director shall prepare a written recommendation regarding disposition of the request which shall be given to the commission together with the request. "G<lod cause" shall be determined based upon the legal sufficiency or insufficiency of the complaint to allege a violation and the reasons given by the complainant for wishing to withdraw the complaint. If withdrawal is permitted, the commission must close the investigation and the case. No further action may be taken. The complaint will become a public record at the time of withdrawal.
(3) For the purposes of commission jurisdiction, a violation shall mean the willful performance of an act prohibited by this chapter or chapter 104 or the willful failure to perform an act required by this chapter or chapter 104. The commission may not by rule determine what constitutes willfulness or
81 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

further define the term "willful" for purooses of this chapter or chapter 104. Willfulness is a determination of fact; however, at the request of the respondent at any time after probable cause is found, willfulness may be considered and determined in an informal hearing before the commission.
(4) The commission shall undertake a preliminary investigation to determine if the facts alleged in a sworn complaint or a matter initiated by the division constitute probable cause to believe that a violation has occurred.
(i)l. Upon a commission finding of probable cause, the counsel for the commission shall attempt to reach a consent agreement with the respondent. At any time the commission may enter into a consent order with a respondent without requiring the resoondent to admit to a violation of law within the jurisdiction of the commission.
2. A consent agreement is not binding upon either party unless and until it is signed by the respondent and by counsel for the commission upon approval by the commission.
3. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the commission from entering into a consent agreement with a respondent prior to a commission finding ofprobable cause ifa respondent indicates in writing a desire to enter into negotiations directed towards reaching such a consent agreement. Any consent agreement reached under this subparagraph is subject to the provisions of subparagraph 2. and shall have the same force and effect as a consent agreement reached after the commission finding of probable cause.
In a case where probable cause is found, the commission shall make a preliminary determination to consider the matter or to refer the matter to the state attorney for the judicial circuit in which the alleged violation occurred. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, the commission may, at its discretion, dismiss any complaint at any stage of disposition if it determines that the public interest would not be served by proceeding further, in which case the commission shall issue a public report stating with particularity its reasons for the dismissal.
(5) 'lfflless A person alleged by the Elections Commission to have committed a violation of this chapter or chapter 104 may elect as a matter of right eleeta, within 30 days after the date of the filing of the commission's allegations, to have a formal administrative aP informal hearing conducted befape the eammissian, aP eleete ta resalve the eamplaint by eansent a•de£, saeh persan shall be entitled ta a farmal admiaistrati, e heaPing eandaeted by an administrative law judge in the Division ofAdministrative Hearings. The administrative law judge in such proceedings shall enter a final order...Jrllli;h may include the imposition ofcivil oenalties subject to appeal as provided in s. 120.68. If the person does not elect to have a hearing by an administrative law judge and does not elect to resolve the complaint by a consent order the person is entitled to a formal or informal hearing conducted before the commission.
82 CODING: Words striekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 43 of 45 PageID 268

Ch. 2011·40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

Section 71. Subsection (1) ofsection 106.26, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.26 Powers of commission; rights and responsibilities of parties; findings by commission.-
(1) The commission shall, pursuant to rules adopted and published in accordance with chapter 120, consider all sworn complaints filed with it and all matters reported to it by the Division ofElections. In order to carry out the responsibilities prescribed by this chapter, the commission is empowered to subpoena and bring before it, or its duly authorized representatives, any person in the state, or any person doing business in the state, or any person who has filed or is required to have filed any application, document, papers, or other infunnation with an office or agency of this state or a political subdivision thereof and to require the production of any papers, books, or other records relevant to any investigation, including the records and accounts of any bank or trust company doing business in this state. Duly authorized representatives of the commission are empowered to administer all oaths and affirmations in the manner prescribed by law to witnesses who shall appear before them concerning any relevant matter. Should any witness fail to respond to the lawful subpoena of the commission or, having responded, fail to answer all lawful inquiries or to turn over evidence that has been subpoenaed, the commission may file a complaint in the laefere any circuit court where the witness resides sf the state setting up such failure on the part of the witness. On the filing of such complaint, the court shall take jurisdiction of the witness and the subject matter of said complaint and shall direct the witness to respond to all lawful questions and to produce all documentary evidence in the witness's possession which is lawfully demanded. The failure of any witness to comply with such order of the court shall constitute a direct and criminal contempt of court, and the court shall punish said witness accordingly. However, the refusal by a witness to answer inquiries or turn over evidence on the basis that such testimony or material will tend to incriminate such witness shall not be deemed refusal to comply with the provisions of this chapter. The sheriffs in the several counties shall make such service and execute all process or orders when required by the commission. Sheriffs shall be paid for these services by the commission as provided for in s. 30.231. Any person who is served with a subpoena to attend a hearing of the commission also shall be served with a general statement informing him or her of the subject matter of the commission's investigation or inquiry and a notice that he or she may be accompanied at the hearing by counsel of his or her own choosing.
Section 72. Subsections (1) through (4) of section 106.265, Florida Statutes, are amended and renumbered, and present subsection (5) of that section is renumbered as subsection (6), to read:
106.265 Civil penalties.-
(1) The commission or, in cases referred to the Division ofAdministrative Hearings pursuant to s. 106.25(5), the administrative law jud~ is authorized
83 CODING: Words stHeliefl are deletions; words~ are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

upon the finding of a violation of this chapter or chapter 104 to impose civil penalties in the form offines not to exceed $1,000 per count or if aoulicable, to impose a civil nenalty as provided in s 104.271 or s 106 19.
.(2] In determining the amount of such civil penalties, the commission !!!: administrative law judge shall consider, among other mitigating and aggravating circumstances:
(a) The gravity of the act or omission;
(b) Any previous history of similar acts or omissions;
(c) The appropriateness of such penalty to the financial resources of the person, political committee, committee of continuous existence. electioneerin&r communications Ofianizatjon, or political party; and
(d) Whether the person, political committee, committee of continuous existence, electioneerine- communications o~nization, or political party has shown good faith in attempting to comply with the provisions ofthis chapter or chapter 104.
{ID{21 If any person, political committee, committee of continuous existence electioneering communications oruanization or political party fails or 'refuses to pay to the commission any civil penalties assessed pursuant to the provisions of this section, the commission shall be responsible for collecting the civil penalties resulting from such action.
(1}(01 Any civil penalty collected pursuant to the provisions ofthis section shall be deposited into the General Revenue Fund Eleetieft Camjlaigt> Fiftaaeffig Trust F>Hul.
fQ2\4) Netwithstruuliftg any ether jlFB cisiefts ef this ehlljlter, Any fine assessed pursuant to the fJPB .isiefts ef this chapter shall, •,yhiela Hfte is <leoigsate<l telae <lefJesite<l er ,,hieh .. auld etlael'\.ise be deposited into the General Revenue Fund ef the state, shall lae llefJesite<l iftte the Eleetieft CamiJaigs Fiftaaeiftg Trust F01ft<l.
Section 73. Subsection (1) and paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section 106.29, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
106.29 Reports by political parties; restrictions on contributions and expenditures; penalties.-
(!) The state executive committee and each county executive committee ofeach political party regulated by chapter 103 shall file regular reports ofall contributions received and all expenditures made by such committee. However, the reports shall not include contributions and expenditures that are reported to the Federal Election Commission In addition when a special election is called to fill a vacancy in office each state executive committee, each affiliated party committee, and each county executive committee making contributions or expenditures to influence the results of
84 CODING: Words etriekeft are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 44 of 45 PageID 269

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

the special election or the preceding special primary election must file campaign treasurers' reports on the dates set by the Department of State pursuant to s 100 111 Such reports shall contain the same information as do reports required of candidates by s. 106.07 and shall be filed on the lOth day following the end of each calendar quarter, except that, during the period from the last day for candidate qualifYing until the general election, such reports shall be filed on the Friday immediately preceding each special primary election special election heth-the primary election,. and the general election. In addition to the reports filed under this section, the state executive committee and each county executive committee shall file a copy ofeach prior written acceptance of an in-kind contribution given by the committee during the preceding calendar quarter as required under s. 106.08(6). Each state executive committee shall file the sriginel and sne espy sf its reports with the Division of Elections. Each county executive committee shall file its reports with the supervisor of elections in the county in which such committee exists. Aoy state or county executive committee failing to file a report on the designated due date shall be subject to a fine as provided in subsection (3). No separate fine shall be assessed for failure to file a copy of any report required by this section.
(3)
(b) Upon determining that a report is late, the filing officer shall immediately notifY the chair of the executive committee as to the failure to file a report by the designated due date and that a fine is being assessed for each late day. The fine shall be $1,000 for a state executive committee, and $50 for a county executive committee, per day for each late day, not to exceed 25 percent of the total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report. However, if an executive committee fails to file a report on the Friday immediately preceding the special election or general election, the fine shall be $10,000 per day for each day a state executive committee is late and $500 per day for each day a county executive committee is late. Upon receipt ofthe report, the filing officer shall determine the amount of the fine which is due and shall notifY the chair. N_otice is deemed complete upon proof of delivery of written notice to the mailing or street address on record with the filing officer The filing officer shall determine the amount of the fine due based upon the earliest of the following:
1. When the report is actually received by such officer.
2. When the report is postmarked.
3. When the certificate of mailing is dated.
4. When the receipt from an established courier company is dated.
5. When the electronic receipt issued pursuant to s. 106.0705 is dated.
Such fine shall be paid to the filing officer within 20 days after receipt of the notice of payment due, unless appeal is made to the Florida Elections
85 CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

Commission pursuant to paragraph (c). Ao officer or member of an executive committee shall not be personally liable for such fine.
Section 74. Subsection (5) ofsection 106.35, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
106.35 Distribution of funds.-
(5) The division shall adopt rules providing for the weekly reports and certification and distribution of funds pursuant thereto required by this section. Such rules shall, at a minimum, provide for!
(a) Speeilieatisns fer printed eampaign treasurer's reparts auUining the fermat fer sueh ref!sl'ts, ineleding si•e sf paper, tyjlefaee, ealar af f!FiRt, and plaeement ef reljuired infermatian an the ferm.
fb)b specifications for electronically transmitted campaign treasurer's reports outlining communication parameters and protocol, data record formats, and provisions for ensuring security of data and transmission.
2. AJI eleetrsnieally transmitted eamf!aign treasu•er's •ef!arls must also be liled in f!Fiated fermat. Printed fermat shall nat iaelude eamf!aign tFeasurer's ref!arts submitted by eleetFaaie feesimile tFilftsmissiaa.
Section 75. Paragraph (b) of subsection (12) of section 112.312, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
112.312 Definitions.-Aa used in this part and for purposes of the provisions of s. 8, Art. II of the State Constitution, unless the context otherwise requires:
(12)
(b) "Gift" does not include:
1. Salary, benefits, services, fees, commissions, gifts, or expenses associated primarily with the donee's employment, business, or service as an officer or director of a corporation or organization.
, 2. Contributions or expenditures reported pursuant to chapter 106, contributions or expenditures reported pursuant to federal election law campaign-related personal services provided without compensation by individuals volunteering their time, or any other contribution or expenditure by a political party.
3. An honorarium or an expense related to an honorarium event paid to a person or the person's spouse.
4. An award, plaque, certificate, or similar personalized item given in recognition of the donee's public, civic, charitable, or professional service.
86 CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-6 Filed 07/27/12 Page 45 of 45 PageID 270

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

5. An honorary membership in a service or fraternal organization presented merely as a courtesy by such organization.
6. The use of a public facility or public property, made avaHable by a governmental agency, for a public purpose.
7. Transportation provided to a public officer or employee by an agency in relation to officially approved governmental business.

8. Gifts provided directly or indirectly by a state, regional, or national organization which promotes "the exchange of ideas between, or the professional development of, governmental officials or employees, and whose membership is primarily composed of elected or appointed public officials or staff, to members of that organization or officials or staff of a governmental agency that is a member of that organization.
Section 76. Paragraph (d) of subsection (1) of section 112.3215, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

112.3215 Lobbying before the executive branch or the Constitution Revision Commission; registration and reporting; investigation by commission.-
(1) For the purposes of this section:
(d) "Expenditure" means a payment, distribution, loan, advance, reimbursement, deposit, or anything of value made by a lobbyist or principal for the purpose oflobbying. The term "expenditure" does not include contributions or expenditures reported pursuant to chapter 106 or contributions or ellj)enditures reported pursuant to federal election law, campaign-related personal services provided without compensation by individuals volunteering their time, any other contribution or expenditure made by or to a political party, or any other contribution or expenditure made by an organization that is exempt from taxation under 26 U.S.C. s. 527 or s. 501(c)(4).
Section 77. Subsection (1) ofsection 876.05, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
876.05 Public employees; oath.-
(I) All persons who now or hereafter are employed by or who now or hereafter are on the payroll of the state, or any of its departments and agencies, subdivisions, counties, cities, school boards and districts of the free public school system of the state or counties, or institutions of higher learning, ruul all eaadidates foF publie eftiee, except candidates for federal office, are required to take an oath before any person duly authorized to take acknowledgments of instruments for public record in the state in the following form:
87 CODING: Words stPiekeft are, deletions; words underlined are additions.
·~ .~

Ch. 2011-40

LAWS OF FLORIDA

Ch. 2011-40

I, ......, a citizen ofthe State ofFiorida and ofthe United States ofAmerica, and being employed by or an officer of ...... and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida.
Section 78. Section 876.07. Florida Statutes, is repealed.
Section 79. If any provision ofthis act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications ofthe act which can be civen effect without the invalid provision or application and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.
Section 80. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this act, this act shall take effect upon becoming a law.
Approved by the Governor May 19, 2011.
Filed in Office Secretary of State May 19, 2011.

88 CODING: Words stFielrea are deletions; words underlined are additions.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 27 PageID 271
Exhibit 2c

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 27 PageID 272

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OFSTATE
CHAPTER2011-40, LAWS OF FLORIDA (HB 1355)
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PRE-cLEARANCE SUBMISSION
PURSUAJ\'T TO SECTION 5 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

section 1
2

·Statute/Law . 97.012
97.021

' Status of law prior to effective date ot:ch~nge •· . .Chari2eto·bnv• •·

'

'.,,·'.

:Eff.Date·••

Sets out the Secretary ofState's duties as the chief elections official ofthe state ranging from maintaining uniformity in the interpretation of the elections laws to administering the Florida Voter Registration System to conducting preliminary investigations into voting and registration
irregularities or fraud.

• Adds that the Secretary ofState has the duty to provide written direction and opinions that would apply uniformly throughout the state to all supervisors of elections regarding their duties under the Florida Election Code or rules adopted by the Department of State's Division of Elections. The Division of Elections over whom the Secretary has oversight already issues advisory opinions to those persons or entities specified in law as being able to request the opinion.

May 19, 2011

Detmes words or phrases as used throughout the Florida Election Code (chapters 97-l06, Florida Statutes).

• Revises the definition for 'minor political party" to crossreference a newly created section .in chapter 103, Florida Statutes, relating to the presidential electors; political parties and committees.
Cf. Sections 46 of chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

May 19, 2011

.":>

97.025

Requires the Department ofState to print the Florida Election Code which comprises chapters 97-106, Florida Statutes, into a publication separate and apart from the Florida Statutes.

Requires the publication to be made available to each candidate who qualifies with the Department arid to the Supervisors of Eleetions which means that the publication can be provided online in lieu ofby
hardcopy.

May 19, 2011

4
tiMia.

97.0575

Sets forth registration and requirements for thirdparty voter registration organizations:
• A "third-party voter registration organization"
is defined·as by§ 97.021(37), Flmida Statutes,
as "any IlersOri, entity, or organization
soliciting dr collecting voter registration

~

-~
:-mr
=i DOJ Preclearance Submi!ision for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

Amends registration and reporting requirements for third-party voter registration organizations as follows:
• Retains existing requirement that third-party voter
registration organizations register with the Division of Elections before engaging in any voter registration activities. Amends registration requirements to include the

May 19, 2011
1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 27 PageID 273

~Section · Statute/Law

Status~flawprior to effective date ofchange· . '
applications" with the exception ofa person registering or collecting an application from that person's spouse, child or parent; or a person who collects voter registration
applications as an employee or agent ofthe
Division of Elections, Supervisor of Elections' office, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles or a voter registration agency.
• Third-party voter registration organizations must register with the Division of Elections prior to engaging in any voter registration activities.
• Third-party voter registration organizations must submit a report to the Division of Elections on or before the 15th day after the end of each calendar quarter providing the date and location of any organized voter registration drives conducted by the organization in the prior calendar quarter.
• Third-party voter registrations must promptly deliver voter registration applications to the Division of Elections or Supervisor of Elections.
• Provides that third-party voter registration organizations are subject to fines: (l) for each application submitted mor.e than I0 days after the applicant delivered the completed application to the third-party registration organization; (2) for each application collected by a third-party voter registration organization before book dosing for a given election and received by the Division ofElections or Supervisor of Elections after the book dosing deadline for the election; and (3) for each application collected by a third-party voter

eto'law

'<

names and addresses ofthird-party voter registration

organization's registration agent and removes requirement

that third-party voter registration .organizations provide

names of their board of directors. Requires registration

agents to provide a sworn statement that the agent will obey

all state laws and rules regarding the registration of voters.

• Requires the State and Supervisors ofElections to provide voter registration forms to third~party voter registration organizations. Requires forms to contain information identifying the organization to which they were provided.

• Requires the Division of Elections to maintain a database of all third-party voter registration organizations and the voter registration forms assigned to each organization. Requires
Supervisors of Elections to provide information to the
Division regarding voter registration forms provided to and
received from third-party voter registration organizations.

• Amends existing requirement that third-party voter registration organizations "promptly" deliver each voter registration application to the Division of Elections or Supervisor of Elections to Specifically require that applications be delivered within 48 hours (or the next business day ifthe appropriate office is closed for the 48-
hour period).

• Amends schedule offines imposed on third-party voter registration organizations for failure to promptly deliver voter registration applications to conform to 48-hour delivery requirement. Retains existing fine amounts and aggregate fme limit of$1,000 per third-party voter registration organization for violations committed in a calendar year. Removes provision providing for reduction in fmes based on compliance with registration requirements.

• Requires Division of Elections to adopt rules to ensure the integrity ofthe registration proces~,.in~luding rules

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Electians Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 27 PageID 274

5 and6

tatutt!!Law · ·····-··-

.:Err.nat:e ... cc:-

Status·(lfl~w·prlodo effective date ofchan!!e ,·. · .. registration organization that is not submitted

•

·

Change

tr.eJq.Iuaiwrin··.g·.····t···h····i··r···d···•-·..·p...•a. rty····v· o.t.e..r.

... · .. ·
'
registration

·< .•.•. .•.•.•••..·., .•
organizations to

>::

.:

to the Division of Elections or Supervisor of

account for registration fonns used by their registration

Elections.

agents.

• Provides for waiver of fines by :the Secretary
of State upon a showing that failure to deliver

• Amends provision authorizing Division of Elections to
investigate violations ofand enforce the provisions of§

the voter registration application promptly is

97.0575, Florida Statutes, to instead authorize the Secretary

based upon force majeure or impossibility of

ofState to refer potential violations to the Attorney General

perfonnance.

for enforcement.

• Provides that the aggregate fine that may be
assessed against a third-party voter registration organization for violations committed in a calendar year is $1,000. Provides that fines will be reduced by three-fourths for third-party voter registration organizations that have complied with the registration requirements of
§ 97.0575, Florida Statutes.
• Provides the Division of Elections with
authority to investigate any violation of§ 97.0575, Florida Statutes, and to assess civil

• Provides that amendments to§ 97.0575, Florida Statutes,
apply to any third-party voter registration organization
registered with the Department of State as of the effective
day ofCh. 2011-40, Laws of Florida. Third-party voter
registration organizations must comply with law as amended within 90 days after the Department provide.s notice of the amended requirements. Provides that failure to comply with the law as amended within 90 days will result in the cancellation ofa third-party voter registration
organization's registration.

fmes.

• Provides that civil fines provided in §97.0575,
Florida Statutes7 are in addition to any applicable criminal penalties.

• Requires the Department of State to adopt

rules as necessary to implement the statutory

provision:.

The list of3'd party voter registration organizations registered with the State is made available currently
on a Excel spreadsheet at: h!tQ://election.dos.state.fl.us/!Qvr/

97.071

Requires voter information card to contain the following infonnation:
• Voter registration number

• Requires new voter infonnation cards issued on or after A%oust 1, 2012, to include polling place address in addition to
infonnation previously required.

August 1, 2012

DOJ Pre~learance SubmissiQn {Qr Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws QfFlQrida

3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 27 PageID 275

ate ofchan.;
• Date ofregistration • Fullname • Party affiliation • Date ofbirth • Address oflegal residence • Precinct number • Name ofand contact information for
Supervisor ofElections • Other information deemed necessary

.·•·

.; ·..

• Adds requirement that Supervisor of Elections issue new voter informatiDn card to a voter when a polling place address

changes.

Eff. Date.,.. <·.·

7

97.073

Requires a voter information card to be issued
anytime the voter requests a replacement card, or I
makes au address, name or political party change.
Requires the Supervisor of Elections to notify an applicant regarding the disposition of his or her voter registration application.

• Imposes a 5 business day timeframe in which the Supervisor of Elections must notify an applicant that his or her application has been approved, is incomplete, has been denied, or is a dupHcate
of an existing registration.

May 19, 2011

• Requires a person to update his or her voter registration record whenever there is au address change, name change, or political party

• Expands options for a voter to change his or her residence

address of both

in the voter registration record by allowing notification
in-CDunty and ~ounty-to-county address changes to be

affiliation change.

provided to Supervisor of Elections: (1) by telephone or

electronic means (with dateofbirth); (2) using a voter

• For in-cDunty address changes, requires that a

registration application; or (3) by other signed written notice.

8

97.1031

voter notify the Supervisor ofElections within that county using a signed written notice, by telephone, or electronic means. Notification other than by signed, written notice must include the voter's date ofbirth.

• Expands options for a voter to change his or her political party affiliation by allowing notification to be provided to Supervisor of Elections or other voter registration official by using a signed written notice containing the voter's date of birth or voter registration number, rather than requiring change to be

May 19, 2011

• For address changes from one county to another county, requires that a voter notify a voter registration official using a voter registration
application.

submitted on a voter registration application.
• Expands options for a voter to submit <:hanges to his or her name in the voter registration record by allowing notification to be provided to Supervisor of Elections or other voter registration official by using a signed writteu notice containing the voter's

date of birth Dr voter registration number, rather than requiring

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 27 PageID 276

:section 9
10 11

[· Statute/Law 98.075
98.093 98.0981

Jaw .· · ··. Status of lawprior to effective date ofchange ..·. [· Cb_anJ?;eto

. ·.·.

. ·.• ···

. ·........·. -···· /-.LErtDate•.... ·

• For changes to a voter's name or political party

change to be submitted on voter registration application.

affiliation, requires that a voter notify a voter

registration official using a voter registration

application.

Requires Department of State to identifY registered voters who are deceased using information received from the Florida Department of Health.

• Expands the data/information sources that may be used to remove registered voters identified as deceased to include information obtained from the United States Social Security

Requires supervisors to remove the name ofa deceased registered voter upon receiptofthe information from the Department ofHealth or United States Social Security Administration thnmgh the statewide voter registration system

Administration, including any master death file or index
• Imposes 7-day deadline for supervisors of elections to remove the name ofa deceased registered voter after receipt of information from the Department of Health or United States Social Security Administration through the statewide voter registration system.

May 19, 2011

• Requires supervisors ofelections to remove the name ofa deceased registered voter from the statewide voter registration
system upon receipt ofa copy ofa death certificate issued by a
governmental agency authorized to issue death certificates.

Requires state and local governmental agencies to
provide information and access to the Department of
State to ensure the maintenance of accurate and
current voter registration records.

• Updates the law to reflect that the Florida Parole Commission rather than the Board of Executive Clemency is now responsible for furnishing clemency data.
• Changes the frequency of clemency reports to be submitted to the Department of State from monthly to bimonthly.

• Specifies additional information that must be included in clemency data, to include driver? s license number, Florida identification card number, the last four digits ofthe person's social security number, ifavailable, and record identifiers assigned by the Department ofLaw Enforcement.

May 19, 2011

• Clarifies that the role ofthe Department ofCorrections is to provide information to enable the Department of State to identifY registere<i voters who are convicted felons and to meet
its obligations under state and federal law.

• Requires supervisors of elections to transmit completely updated voting history information

• Amends the reporting dea.dlim:s for supervisors of elections Eff. July 1,

to transmit voting history and precinct level results to the

2012

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

5

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 27 PageID 277

Sectlo
12 13

tute/Law
99.012 99.021

Status ofiaw prior to effective date'OrC:Ii.an{!e.
for each qualified voter who voted within 45 days after a general election.
• Requires the Department ofState to prepare a report using the voting data provided by supervisors of elections and submit a report containing specified information to the Florida Legislature within 60 days after a general election.
• Requires Supervisors ofElections to collect and submit to the Department of State precinct-level election results containing specified data within 45 days after a presidential preference primary election, special election, or general election

Department of State from 45 days to 30 days after certification by the Elections Canvassing Commission of a presidential preference primary, special election, primary election, or general election.
• Amends the reporting deadline for the Department of State
to submit a report to the Florida Legislature from 60 days to
45 days after certification ofelection results by the Elections Canvassing Commission of a presidential preference primary, special election, primary election, or general election.
• Codifies the file specifications for voting history and election results data.
• Requires the Supervisors of Elections to reconcile election results with voting history data.
• Requires precinct-level election results received from the SupervisorofElections within 30 days after the certification of election results in specified elections to be made _publicly available in a searchable, sortable and downloadable database per statutory file specifications.

Provides that the name ofany person who does not comply with Florida's resign-to-nm requirements may be removed from the ballot when ordered by a circuit Court.
Provides the requirements for completing a candidate oath.

• Clarifies that ifan order of a court that has become final determines that a person did not comply with Florida's resignto-run requirements, the person shall not be qualified as a canqidate for election and his or her name may not appear OJ;l the ballot.
• Amends law to expressly exclude persons seeking the office of President or Vice President ofthe United States from Florida's resign-to-run law.
• Removes reference in the candidate oath to public employee loyalty oath that is taken only after a candidate has been elected
and becomes a public officiaL
• Revises the candidate oath to require support of the United States Constitution and Florida Constitution.

May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40; Laws of Florida

6

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 27 PageID 278

'Seetiori

14

99.061

Provides the method for qualifYing as a nominee or candidate for federal, state, county or district office including all the forms and information that must be
provided.

• Codifies existing practice in which candidates who are qualifYing for presidency under Chapter I03, Florida Statutes, (relating to presidential electors, political party committees) are not required to complete the state candidate oath.
• Replaces requirement that a printed copy ofthe oath to be furnished to the candidate by the qualifYing officer with a requirement that the oath be made available to the candjdate.
• Revises oath for candidates seeking nomination of political party to state that the candidate has not been registered as a member of another party for 365 days before the beginning of qualifying.
Cf_ s. 51L~· 2Q!_l-40, Laws of Florida
• Requires fmancial disclosure statements and candidate's oath to be executed before a notary or other person authorized to administer oaths.
• Requires the qualifying check drawn upon candidate's account to be made payable to the person or entity prescribed by the filing office\ (unless the candidate obtained the required ntnnber of signatures to qualifY by petition).
• Removes reference to public employee loyalty Dath that is taken only after a candidate has been elected and becomes a public official.
• Provides that a candidate whose qualifying checl< is returned by the bank for any reason shall have until the end of qualifYing to pay the fee with a ·cashier's check (rather than ·48 hours after notification by the qualifying officer regarding the returned check).
• CGdifies case law that filing officer performs a ministerial function in revie\¥ing qualifying papers and review is limited to whether all required items have been properly filed and whether each item is complete on its face and not whether the contents of the qualifYing papers are accurate.
• Provides that the decision ofa qualifYing officer concerning

May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 201140, Laws of Florida

7

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 27 PageID 279

Section: .Statute/Law7= Status·of law pr!or to effectiv~.d.a:te of change

Change t&iaw

... ·: 7C·

. .., ·.·.· ·; :/"'·::,:-(:·· ;-cc Effl>'Dite< .•.•.-.

whether a cand......i...d··.··a····t··e is qualif'~:ed is exempt from administrative

review under chapter 12{), Florida Statutes (relating to the

AdJninistrative Procedures Act).

15

99.063

16

99.092

17

99.093

18

99.095

19

99.097

Provides the method for qualifYing as a candidate for Lt. Governor.

• Now requires candidate's oath for Lt. Governor to be executed before notary or other person authorized to administer oaths.
• Removes reference to public employee loyalty oath that is taken only after a candidate has been elected and becomes a public officiaL

May 19, 2011

Requires election assessment fees which are a part of the qualifying fees to be deposited into the Clearing Funds Trust Fund and then transferred to the Elections Commission Trust Fund \.vithin the Department of Legal Affairs. Requires municipal candidate's election assessment fees which are a part ofthe qualifYing fees to be forwarded to th.e Department of State for transfer to the Elections Commission Trust Fund within the Department ofLegal Affairs, Provides the method for qualifYing for office by petition in lieu of qualifying fee and party assessments.
• Sets forth the requirements for verifying
signatures on petitions including candidate and initiative petitions.

• Streamlines the deposit ofthe election assessment by requiring transfer directly into the Elections Commission Trust Fund.

May 19, 2011

• Requires the municipal candidate's election assessment to be forwarded directly to the Florida Elections Commission for
deposit into the Elections Commission Trust Fund.

May 19, 2011

• Provides special provisions for county or district candidates qualifying by petition in year ofappor:tionment, allowing
signatures to be obtained from any registered voter in the
respective county, without regard for district boundaries, and providing that candidate shall obtain at least the number of signatures of one percent of the total number of registered voters divided by tbe total number of districts of the office involved.
• Codifies existing rule that signatures for citizen initiative petitions may not be verified by the random sample method.
• Revises signature verification process to require all other requirements ofthe petition to be satisfied before the signature

May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 27 PageID 280

20

100.061

21

100.101

22

100.111

• Provides two methods for signature verification: 1) name-by-name/signature-by-signature or 2) random sample method_
• Allows petition verification results by random sample method to be contested in circuit court.
• Permits a candidate, person, or organization to have petition signatures verified at no cost where payment of signature verification fee would result in an undue burden on the resources ofthe party filing the undue burden certification.
Sets the date for holding a primary election for political party candidates on the Tuesday ofthe lOth week before the general election. Sets forth events requiring a special election and special primary election.
Sets forth the process for filling a vacancy in office or nomination. • Provides that no special election is required to
fill a vacancy in a state or county office required to be filled by election where, during an election year, the incumbent has qualified as a candidate for federal office. Instead, persons seeking nomination or election to the vacated office shall qualifY during the state qualifYing period.

, ·. ..·.·.·.: ·.·..

can be verified as valid_

• Revises language describing signature verification process while retaining substantive standard that signatures shall be verified and counted as valid for a registered voter if the supervisor is
able to determine that the petition signer is the same as the
registered voter, even ifthe name on the petition is not in
substantially the same form as in the voter registration system.

• Provides that an undue burden oath may not be filed in lieu of paying the signature verification fee where a person has been paid to collect signatures on a petition.

• Requires payment ofsignature verification fee by a candidate, person, or organization submitting an undue burden oath where payment is subsequently made to any person to solicit signatureS on a petition. Payment shall be made from any contributions received under chapter I 06, Florida Statutes (relating to
campaiw. financing)

• Moves the State's primary election from 10 weeks to 12 weeks before the general election; therefore, the primary in 2012 will
be held on August 14,2012.

May 19, 20ll

• Eliminates an exception to holding a special election in the event
a vacancy in state or county office is created when an incumbent
officeholder qualifies for federal office. See also section 22 of ch. 2011-40, Laws ofFlorida, which eliminates reference to
these two types ofvacancies.

May 19, 2011

• Removes exemption from special election requirements when a vacancy occurs in a state or county office by reason of the incumbent having qualified as a candidate for federal office.
• Revises the process for notifying the political party executive committee regarding a vacancy in nomination created by death, resignation, withdrawal, or removaL Requires the filing officer, rather than the Department of State, to notify the chair of the state or county political party executive committee. Clarifies which political party committee is responsible for filling a

May 19, 2011

DO.J Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

9

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 27 PageID 281

'"Sectio

23

100.371

24

101.001

• Requires Secretary of State to notifY supervisor of elections where such a vacancy OC{;UfS in an election year other than the one immediately preceding eA-piration ofthe present term and requiring supervisor to provide public notice of
the vacancy.
• Requires Department of State to notifY the chair ofthe appropriate political party executive committee in the event that death, resignation, withdrawal, removal, or any other
· cause or event causes the party to have a vacancy in nomination.

vacancy in nomination in different offices.
• Requires political parties to submit the name ofthe person designated to fill a vacancy in nomination to the :filing officer rather than always to the Department ofState.
• Provides that a vacancy in nomination is not created ifan order of a court that has become final determines that a nominee did not properly qualifY or did not meet the necessary qualifications to hold the office for which he or she sought to qualifY.

• Sets forth the process for ballot placement of constitutional amendments proposed by initiative, including verification of petition signatures.
• Provides process for revoking petition signatures by sponsoring committee opposing citizen initiative or by signer ofpetition.
Pertains to setting precinct boundaries and polling places as follows:

• Clarifies that the "appropriate" supervisor of elections to whom signed petitions must be submitted for verification is the supervisor ofelections for the county of residence listed by the person signing the form. Requires supervisors of elections to notifY petition sponsDr Dfmisfi.led petitions.
• Amends the requirement that the petition signer had to be a registered voter ofthe county where the petition was submitted for verification at the time ofsigning the petition. It is now sufficient that the voter be a registered voter ofthe State of Florida (not a specific county) at the time of signing and at the time ofverification.
• Amends the period of validity for signed petitions from 4 y-ears to 2years.
• Eliminates provisions in law relating to revocation of citizen. initiative petitions that were declared unronst:itutional in Browning v. Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc., PAC, 29 So. 3d IQ53 (Fla. 2010).
• Requires supervisors to provide to the Department of State data on recincts in each county associated with the most recent

May 19, 2011
Effective July J, 2012

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

lO

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 27 PageID 282

'Section > •··•• Statute/Law •.· .'.. Stattis of lawpriorto effectiv~date ofchange. ·:
• Requires Supervisors ofElections to maintain
maps regarding geographical boundaries and I designation for precincts in accordance with one I offrve categories ofdesignation: I) census
blocks, 2) governmental units, 3) visible street, stream, rail, lakes, etc appearing on maps, 4) public parks, public school grounds or churches, 5) political subdivisions.
• Requires any changes to boundaries or designation of precincts or polling places to be posted at the supervisor's office.

···changeto Iawc

,• .. : . . ..

:.

. . >,~>····.·.:.:

' <Eff.. Date.·.· ·

decennial census. Requires the Department of State to maintain

a searchable database containing the precincts and the

corresponding most recent decennial census blocks within the

precincts.

• Establishes that the latest U.S. decennial census block is to be used as the default basic unit for creating or changing precinct boundaries.

• Provides an exception ifthe census block boundaries split or conflict with another political boundary, then the precinct boundaries may still be defmed along the other four categories ofdesignation currently existing in law.

• Repeals provision providing that, prior to July 1, 2012, a supervisor of elections could apply for and obtain from the Secretary of State a waiver ofthe precinct boundary requirements.

• Adds requirement that changes to county precinct data must be reported to the Department of State within 10 days after the change.

• Requires precinct boundary data to be provided for all precincts for which precinct-level election results and voting history
results are reported.

25

101.043

Requires every voter to present a photo and signature identification at the polls before voting. Nine acceptable forms of ID exist:
• Florida driver's license • Florida identification card issued by the
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. • United States passport. • Debit or credit card.
• Military identification. • Student identification. • Retirement center identification.

• Prohibits use ofthe address appearing on the identification presented by the voter as the basis to confirm the voter's legal residence or otherwise challenge the voter's legal residence.
• Provides that a voter may not be asked to provide additional information or to recite his or her home address when he or she presents picture identification to the clerk or inspector and the address on the identification matches the address in the supervisor's records.

May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

II

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 27 PageID 283

~on
26 27

atote/Law •·. 101.045 101.131

.:o_ Status oflaw~rior to effective date of chaJ!g_e
• Neighborhood association identification. • Public assistance identification. The signature part ofthe requirement may be satisfied with some other form of identification if llGt on the photo ID. Requires that electors vote in precinct in which they are registered and in which they have legal residence.
Provides that an elector who moves from the precinct in which the elector is registered may vote in the precinct to which he or she has moved his or her legal residence provided the elector completes an affirmation regarding the change oflegal residence or completes a voter registration application indicating the address change.
Provides the process and timelines for designating and approving poll watchers for parties, political contmittees and candidates for specific polling places and early voting sites and for specific hours.

Change to law ••.

....

• Provides that an elector who moves from the precinct in which he or she is registered to another precinct within the same county may vote in the precinct to which he or she has moved his or her legal residence, provided the affirmation or voter registration application are completed by the elector as provided under prior law.
• Provides that, except for an active uniformed services voter
or a member ofhis or her family, an elector whose change of address is from outside the county may not change his or her legal residence at the polling place and vote a regular ballot, but is entitle{} to vote a provisional ballot.
• A ballot of a person casting a provisional ballot "shall be
counted" unless the canvassing board determines by a preponderance of evidence that the person was not entitled to vote (i.e., not a register-ed voter, not voting in precinct corresponding to new address on provisional ballot certmcate, voted before in same election, or fraud). See § 10L048, Fla. Stat.
• Requires poll watcher designations. to be submitted to supervisors of elections on a form prescribed by the Department ofState, Division of Elections.
• Specifies that the officials entitled to designate poll watchers are the chair of a political party county executive committee, the chair of a political committee, and a candidate.
• Provides that poll watchers shall be allowed to enter and watch
polls in all polling rooms and early voting areas within the county in which they have been designated, ifthe number ofpoll watchers in any_particu!ar polling place does not exceed the

E f f . D a t e .. ··
May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 20ll-40, Laws of Florida

12

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 27 PageID 284

Section 28 29,30

Statute/Law .·.·
101.151 10U61

Status"Of law prior to effective (hite of change >
• Sets forth ballot specifications such as the use of
marksense ballots and ballot on demand technology.
• Allows the use ofballot-on-demand technology
to produce absentee ballots and generate ballots during early voting.
• Requires prior approval of Secretary ofState to
use ballot-on-demand technology for generating ballot.<> at the polls on Election Day.
• Provides that minor political party candidates
and candidates with no party affiliation shall have their names appear on th;;: general election ballot in the same order as they were certified_ Provides the parameters for how a constitutional amendment or other public referendum is placed on the ballot.

Chaiiget~·law .. ' ., i< .<) . < ···<<··. .

\ / ...........

number allowed for each candidate, political committee or

political party.

• Requires supervisors ofelections to provide poll watcher identification badges to poll watchers no later than 7 days before early voting begins. Requires each poll watcher to wear his or her identification badge while in the polling room ot e.arly
voting area

• Expands authority of Supervisors ofElections to use ballot-ondemand technology to produce marksense election-day ballots without requiring prior approval from Secretary of State.

• Revises the ballot layout to remove redundant beadings that preceded office titles.

• Provides that the names of minor political party candidates shall appear on the general election ballot in the order they were qualified, followed by the names ofcandidates with no party affiliation, in the order they were qualified.

May 19, 2011

• Clarifies exemption ofconstitutional amendments proposed by joint resolution from ballot summary requirements.
• Sets up a new process by which joint resolutions proposing a constitutional amendment or revision are placed on the ballot which includes:
0 A 30 day window from the date a joint legislative resolution is filed with the Secretary ofState to challenge the joint resolution's ballot statement.
0 Authority of the Attorney General to prepare a revised ballot title or summary in the event the Court fmds that ali ballot statements embodied in a joint resolution are defective. (must be completed within 10 days)
0 A 10-day window to challenge judicially the Attorney

May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

13

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 27 PageID 285

·section .•·· Statute/Law_.::_

31

101.5605

32

101.5606

33

10L56075

34

!01.5612

St:itusoflawprioFto.effectivedate;of(%ingcf' ..• Chan:getolaw•i • ><,

····•

•·.•·•·· ·, .>··.•·.•••···· <. ··•

General's revision ofthe ballot statement

o Expressly authorizes the use of the full text ofthe amendment or revision in place ofa ballot summary. Provides a statutory presumption that a ballot statement that consists ofthe full text of an amendment or revision is a clear and unambiguous statement ofthe substance and effect of the amendment or revision, providing fair notice to the electors ofthe content ofthe amendment or revision and
sufficiently advising electors ofthe issue upon which they
are to vote.

• Provides that amendment of section 101.161 applies retroactively to all joint resolutions adopted by the Legislature during the 2011 Regular Session..

Sets forth the process for examining and approving voting equipment.

• Corrects an error in law that referred to non-existent electronic industry standards for evaluating voting systems and replaces it with cross-reference to standards a4sP!ed by department rule.

forth the requirements for approving electronic [ . Eliminates re£.crence to outmoded methods ofproducing

ng systems.

precinct totals.

~~~~==~~~~~~~==
Sets forth the primary method for voting in Florida which is by marksense ballot with an exception fDr persons with disabilities who may Dpt to use touch

• Mandates that, by December 3 I, 2013, all voting systems used in the state for a state electiDn must be capable of placing th.e entire text ofa constitutional amendment including stricken or

screen technology.

underlined text on the ballot. (This corresponds to changes in

section 29). This represents a change from current practice

which is just to place the ballot summary ofa constitutional

amendment or revision. .

Sets forth the methodology for testing voting systems.

• Changes the random sample testing of voting systems:
o Requires testing ofeither 5 percent or 10 of the optical scan machines, whichever is greater; and

o Requires testing of least 2 percent of the touch screen systems.

This reflects Florida's elimination ofthe touch screen voting devices as the primary I]),~Dd for voting in Florida, white

ff:Date<.. ·.
May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011
May 19, 20ll

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

14

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 27 PageID 286

35

101.5614

, Provides the process for public canvassing of election returns and duplicating damaged absentee ba!l<Jts and write-in ballots.

• Clarifies the process for canvassing write-in votes cast on a ballot to allow for review of ballot or ballot image.

May 19, 20ll

Requires a voting system audit to be conducted after

certificati<Jn of each election. The audit consists of a

36

1DL591

public manual tally of votes cast in one randDmly selected race that appears on the ballot. The audit must be completed no later than 7 days after certificatiDn and a report must be filed with the

• Creates an exception for conducting a mandatory post-elections
voting systems audit if a manual recount is undertaken pursuant to § 102.166, Fla. Stat.

May l9, 20ll

Department of State within 15 days thereafter.

• Sets forth the process for requesting, delivering
and returning an absentee ballot.

• Mandates the daily reporting by noDn ofthe
following day all prior day absentee ballot request and ballot processing information including who requested, how many were

• Clarifies that a request for an absentee ballot shall be deemed
sufficientto receive an absentee ballot for all elections through the end of the calendar year ofthe second ensuing regularly

37

10l.62

requested, how many voted, etc.
• Requires absentee ballots to be sent no later than
45 days before each election via the method specified by the voter (e-mail, mail, or fax; default: mail) to the uniformed services voter and overseas voters (UOCAVA voters).
• Requires absentee ballots to be mailed
(nonforwardable, return-if-undeliverable) to all other (rton-UOCAVA) voters to the mailing address on record unless the person specifies that he or she is out of county, temporarily <Jut of home due to natural disaster, or in a medical,

scheduled general election.
• Amends time for supervisors of elections to provide information regarding absentee ballot requests from noon to 8 a.m. and expressly includes weekends.
• Imposes a 7-day window in which absentee ballots must be mailed to ail non-UOCAVA voters (Between the 351h and 281h day before an election), and thereafter requires supervisors of elections to mail absentee ballots within 2 business days after receiving a request.
• Requires absentee ballot to be mailed to. the mailing address on record or any other address specified in the request.

May 19, 2011

rehabilitative or corrections facility; then to

another mailing address.

38

101.65

Provides the content for absentee ballot instruction

Revises the ballot instructions to include notice to the voter that: • The absentee ballot will not be counted ifthe signature on

DOJ Prcclearanc~ Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws ofFh1rida

15

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 27 PageID 287

Section Statute/Law

39

101.657

40

101.68

41

1.6923

• Provides for early voting in county, state, and

federal elections beginning an the 15th day

before an election and ending on the 2nd day

before an election.

• Early voting shall be provided for 8 hours per

weekday and 8 hours in the aggregate each

weekend at each site.
• Early voting sites shall open no sooner than 7
a.m. and close no later than 7 p.m. on each

applicable day.

• Early voting is optional for municipal and

special district elections not held in conjunction

with a county, state, or federal election.

• For special elections held pursuant to§ 100.101, Florida Statutes, provides for early voting

beginning on the 8th day before an election and

ending
.

on

the

2nd

day

before

an

ele. ction.

Provides the process for canvassing absentee ballots which can begin as early as 7 a.m. on the 6th day before the election

the voter's certificate does not match the signature on record (which is the cun·ent standard under section 101.68, Florida Statutes, for not counting an absentee ballot), and
• Signature updates for purposes of absentee or provisional ballot canvassing, can be made up until canvassing of
absentee ballots starts (canvassing may start as early as 15 days before election). Cf. Section 40 ofchapter 2011-40,
Laws of Florida

Eff;.:Date.·

• Requires supervisors of elections to provide to the djvision no later than the 30th day before an election the address of each early voting site and the hours that early voting will occur at each site.
• Compresses the same maximum number of early voting hours (96) from a 14-day period into an 8-day period, beginning on the lOth day and ending on the 3rd day before the election.
• Requires no less than 6 hours of early voting and no more than 12 hours of early voting to be hdd at each site (compared to 8 hours under prior law).
• Retains existing requirement that all early voting sites allow any person in line at the closing of the site to vote.
• Provides supervisors of elections flexibility in scheduling early voting by eliminating requirement that all early voting sites in a county be open on the same days for the same amount oftime.
• Increases weekend early voting hours from 16 aggregate hours (under prior law) to a minimum of 18 and maximum of 36 hours ofweekend early voting.
• Makes it an option to hold early voting for county elections not held in conjunction with federal or state election.

May 19, 2011

• Allows for earlier canvassing of absentee ballots beginning at 7 May 19,

a.m. on the 15th day before the election.

2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

16

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 27 PageID 288

Sectiori . Statute/Law

42

101.75

43

102.!41

44

102.168

··status ()flaw)Ji:iorto. effective dl!te of challge
referred to as "MRG" voters in Florida (Mail-in ReGistrants) pursuantto section 97.535, Florida Statutes. These are persons who have been confirmed to have no Florida driver's license number, no state identification number or social security number and are registering by mail and for the lst time in Florida. They are permitted to register and vote if they provide a form of identification
required by law for which they produce with the
registration fonn or before they vote. Exceptions to special ID requirement for persons subject Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act, and the Unifonned and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting; Act. Provides authority for a municipality to change the date for a municipal election. Requires a 14-day qualifYing period for municipal candidates (current law sets a 4-day qualifying period for county, state and federal offices). Provides the composition and duties ofthe county canvassing board including the responsibility to submit to the Department ofState preliminary election results by II :59 p.m. on election night.
Provides a cause ofaction to contest an election in circuit court including identification ofindispensable parties to the action, the grounds upon which a contest may be based, timeline for filing, serving and

Change to law ·. · ·. ·..
• The absentee ballot will not count if the signature on the ballot certificate does not match the signature on record (which is the current standard under section 101.68, Florida Statutes, for not counting an absentee ballot), and
• Signature updates for purposes of absentee or provisional ballot canvassing, can be made up until canvassing of absentee ballots starts (canvassing may start as early as 15 days before election). Cf. Section 40 ofchapter 2011-40, Laws of florida.
• Removes requirement for 14-day qualifying period and allo;vs a municipality to set by ordinance its 0\Vll qualifYing period for municipal offices.
Changes election night result reporting timeline as follows for the canvassing board and/or supervisor of elections:
• Report all early voting and tabulated absentee ballot results within 30 minutes after the polls close.
• Report all other precinct election results in 45-rninute periodic increments until all results are completely submitted (excludes provisional ballot results).
• Notify the Department of State ifperiodic updates canuot be done as required.
• Submit results in a format pr~ribed by the Departmeut of State.
• Clarifies that the canvassing board responsible for canvassing the election is an indispensable party defendant in county and local elections., and the Elections Canvassing Commission is an

May 19, 2011
May 19,
20ll
May 19, 20ll

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

17

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 27 PageID 289

Section .. Statute/Law . · Status of law prior to effective date ofchal!&_e ·
responding to ~mplaint; and setting of h~ing.

· --· iitdispensable party in f~d~l, state, multicmmty, and judicial elections (with the exception ofcounty court elections).

• Provides that in any contest requiring review ofthe canvassing board's decision on the legality of an absentee ballot based upon a signature comparison, the crrcuit court may not review or consider any evidence other than the signatures on the certificate and in the registration records. The court's review of this issue is
to determine oniy ifthe canvassing board abused its discretion in
making its decision.

45

103.021

Provides the process for placing the names of candidates for President and Vice-President on the general election ballot depending on whether they are associated with a major political party, a minor political party affiliated or not affi1iated with a national party, or without a political party affiliation.

• Changes the defmition for "national party'; from a political party
that is established and admitted to the ballot in one other state to
a political party that is registered with and recognized as a qualified national committee ofa political party by the Federal Election Commission.
(There are currently 7l minor political parties registered in Florida of which possibly 7 would fail into the above category)
http://election.dos.state~fl.us/candidate/parties_shtml

May 19, 2011

• http:J/guerv.nictusa.com/fecimg/abbreviations.htrnl

The substantive provision for creating or registering

• Creates new procedures for minor political parties to register in

a minor political party is set forth in definition only.

Florida (e.g., requires filing of certifjcate showing name of

creation ofminor political parties is contained

organization, names and addresses ofofficers, completed

entirely in definition under section 97.021 which

uniform statewide voter r~on applications reflecting

46

103.095

states that a minor political party is a group with less than 5% of the total number of registered voters in · the state and has filed a certificate with the

affiliation of officers with proposed minor political party); procedures are retroactive for those groups currently registered as minor political parties.

May 19, 20ll

department of state that lists the names ofthe current officers and members ofthe executive committee and includ~s a copy ofits constitution or bylaws.

• Provides the Division rule-making authority for dissolution of political parties.

Cf. Section 2 ofchapter 2011-40, Laws ofFlorida (revising

definition for "minor political party")

47

103.101

• Sets the Presidential Primary Election (PPP) date as the last Tuesday in January in the year for electing a president and vice-president. I

• Eliminates the current date for the PPP and creates a lO-member
PPP Date Selection Committee that is directed to set a new PPP date every four years to fail sometime between the first Tuesday in January and the first Tuesday in March.

May 19, 2011

I

I
DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 20ll-40, Laws of,Florida

18

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 27 PageID 290

48,49

103.141

50

104.29

51

105.031

52

106.011

• Vests the Presidential Candidate Selection Committee (consisting ofthe Secretary of State, the Speaker ofthe Florida House of Representatives, the Senate Preside!Jt, and the chair of each political party required to have a presidential preference primary) as the body responsible for designating the names of candidates who will appear on the PPP ballot.
• Requires the state executive cDmmittee to designate the number of delegates and alternates in accordance with procedures adopted by rule at least 120 days (4 months before the presidential preference primary election.

• Specifies that the Committee shall consist oe three persons selected by the Governor, no more than two ofwhom can be from the same political party; three persons selected by the Speaker of the House ofRepresentatives, no more than two of vihom can be from the same political party; three persons selected by the President ofthe Senate, no more than two of whom can be from the smne political party; and the Secretary of State, who shall serve as the nonvoting chair. The Committee mnst meet and select the date no later than October 1 of the ye.ar preceding the PPP election.
• Eliminates the Presidential Candidate Selection Committee and provides a new process for how presidential candidates will be selected and submitted to the Secretary of State for publication no later than the Ist Tuesday after the 1st Monday in Nov¢mber
ofthe year preceding the PPP.
• Requires the state executive committee to adopt rules f01: .
designating delegates and alternates 60 days (2 months) m heu
of 120 days before the presidential preference primary election..

Provides that a county executive committee member may be removed for violation ofan oath either by at least a 2/3 majority vote ofthe committee members or by the unilateral decision ofthe chair ofthe county executive committee. Provides a l st degree misdemeanor if an election official does not allow a maximum of three people to publicly view the tallying ofballots.
Provides the form of the candidate's oath for judicial races.
Pro.;,ides the definitions for use in chapter 106, Florida Statutes, relating to campaign financing

• Eliminates the state executive committee chair's authority to unilaterally remove a member for violation of an oath.

May 19, 20ll

-_ Revises the criminal viohition to clarifY that the election official must allow as many as 3 people to view the reconciliation of ballots after the olls close. The enalty remains the same.
• Revises the judicial candidate oath form to eliminate reference to a public employee oath and add references to support ofthe United States and Florida Constitutions.
Cf. s. 1.3, chapter 20 I I-40, Laws ofFlorida
• Clarifies that the definition for "contribution" does not include editorial endorsements. [Note: Legislative drafting error omitted

May 19, 2011
May 19, 20II
May 19, 20II

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

19

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 27 PageID 291

:section Statute!Law

53

106.021

54

106.022

55

106.023

56

106.025

57

106.03

Status oflaw prior to effective date ofchan2:e .: .ehan~te to Jaw .. >·::,:

.· •.

· ... :'

.; ...•:> . ·,: )tff/Date :_.:.

including, but not limited to, for what constitutes a

a comma and the word ''or'']

political committee, committees of continuous existence, contributions, independent expenditures,

• Clarifies that the relevant time period for determining whether
independent expenditure conditions apply in a candidate's race

etc.

is after the last day of the qualifYing period for that candidate,

Provides circumstances in which an expenditure does not constitute an independent expenditure.

rather than the default qualifYing period for statewide or legislative office.
• Conforms the statutory cross-reference in the defmition for

"unopposed candidate" to reflect a subsection of law also

renumbered by the new law.

• Revises the defmition of"candidate" to provide that expenditures related to potential candidate polls are not contributions or expenditures for the purpose of the triggering a
candidacy.

Provides the appointment process for campaign treasurers and deputies and setting up deposit{J[ies.

• Eliminates the reporting requirement to provide address of a person to whom a reimbursement was made.

May 19, 2011

Requires each political committee, committee of
continuous existence or electioneering communications organization to appoint a registered agent and to file a statement of such appointment with the Division ofElections.

Sets forth the agent's duties for such committees or

organizations.

Requires a candidate to submit a sworn or affirmed

statement that the candidate "received," read, and

understands the requirements of chapter 106, Florida

Statutes.

Provides requirements f{J[ conducting campaign fund

raisers

I

• Requires the entity's registere.d agent's statement of appointment to be filed with the filing officer corresponding to whom the entity registered in the first place which may or may
not have been the Division of Elections.

• Revises the statutory candidate's statement to reflect that the candidate was "provided access to;' read, and understands the
requirements of chapter 106, Florida Statutes_

• Exempts tickets and advertising for campaign fund raisers from

political advertisement and print " "' ·

·

May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011 May 19,

Requires the registration of political committees and electioneering communication organizations (ECO) upon certain: contribution or expenditures thresholds.

• Changes the threshold for registering as a political committee such that such person or entity no longer has to register based solely on the anticipation ofrather than the "actual" receipt of contributions or expenditure in: excess of$500 in a calendar

May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

20

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 22 of 27 PageID 292

to ·~ .,
'SectiCin

Statute/Law

' Status of law prior effective date of change

Provides the requirements for committees of continuous existence to report expenditures and contributions.

58

Section 106.04

' Change to law ,
year.

··. ······ }

..). ::... • : 1 '"'n~'Date. ·.

• Changes ECO registration requirements such that registration is no longer dependent upon the amount of;my contributions received by the entity, but is dependent solely upon its expenditures. ECOs must now register within: (a) 24 hours of the date on which it makes expenditures for an electioneering communication in excess of$5,000 ifsuch expenditures occur within 30 days ofa primary or special primary election or 60 days before any other election; or (b) 24 hours after the 30th day before a primary or special piimary election, or within 24 hours
after the 60th day before any other election, as applicable, if it
makes expenditures for an electioneering communication in excess of $5,000 before the "30/60 day" election window.

Cf, also Section 60 of ch. 2011-40, Laws of Florida

• Relocates an existing provision oflaw in section 106.07(l)(d)L, Florida Statutes (requiring any committee ofcontinuous existence [CCE] that contributes or expends funds to influence a special primary election and special election to fill a vacancy in
office to file campaign reports).

• Increases late-filing fines for reports immediately preceding primary and special election to $500/day, not to exceed 25 percent ofthe total receipts or expenditures, whichever is greater, for the period covered by the late report.
• Adds that notice to the committee treasurer or registered agent that a late report is deemed sufficient when there is proof of delivery to the address on record with the filing officer.

May 19, 2011

• Modifies the process by which the CCE treasurer may appeal a late filing fee fine within 20 days after receipt of notice. The appeal must now be directly filed with the commission with a copy to the filing officer who assessed the fme rather than just notifYing the filing officer that the CCE intends to appeal or dispute the matter before the Florida Ele{;tions Commission.

• Adds a new requirement for CCEs to report any change in

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

21

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 23 of 27 PageID 293

Section Stati.tte!La

59

106.07

60

106.0703

61

106.0705

62

106.08

information previously ~ub~itt~d-~~ithin l 0 days after the change.
• Clarifies 1hat if a CCE ceases to meet the criteria for
certification, the certification will be revoked.
• Specifies the depositories for fmes assessed against CCEs.

Requires periodic campaign fmance reports by the candidate's or political committee's campaign treasurer and sets forth periodic filing deadlines before and after the elections.
Provides the certification, reporting and filing requirements for electioneering communications organizations. Provides for electronic filing ofcampaign treasurer's reports with the state. Provides for limits on contributions.

• Provides 1hat: (l) Notification to 1he campaign treasurer of incomplete candidate reports must now be by certified (no longer registered) mail or by any common cmrier that provides a proof of delivery. Notice is deemed sufficient when there is proofof delivery to the address on record with the filing officer. The treasurer has 7 days (formerly 3) after receipt oftlle notice to file an addendum to the report. (2) Treasurers must now retain receipts for reimbursement of autllorized expenditures. (3) Copies ofcredit card statements are no longer required, but the report must reflect the transaction information for each credit card purchase. (4) Campaign depositories need no longer return all checks to the <:ampaign treasurer. (5) Increased fines for late filed reports also apply to special primary and special elections, not merely to primary and general elections. (6) Notice offmes for late filed reports by political committees can now also be served on the registered agent of the political committee (in addition to the candidate or chair).
• Eliminates the 'retroactive' electronic reporting requirement for electioneering comniunications organizations who engage in activities prior to registration.
Cf. 57 of ch. 2011-40, Laws of Florida
• Requires a former candidate to report electronically to the Division ofElections his or her disposition ofsurplus funds via the electronic reporting system.
• Eliminates the exceptions for having to return contributions received after a candidate withdraws or is defeated or becomes unopposed or is elected to office. [Note: The chapter law fails

May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011 May 19, · 201 I

DOJ Predearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

22

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 24 of 27 PageID 294

.&ction
63 64 65
66

Statute/Law ····:.• 106.09 106.11 106.141 106.143

orior .Status of law

to effective date ofchange

;>:: Ch~utg_eto law .....·........... '

..... : ...·

. •. . .•... . ·. i... . :..,··· .····· ... ·.. ·]IErf.:DatK ··...·:

to remove cross-reference to paragraph (c) which was eliminated

in paragraph (b)]

• Changes the filing ofthe written acceptance of ill-kind contributions by political parties trom always being filed with the Division. County executive committees now file with the
applicable SOE.

Provides for a $50 limit on cash or cashier check contribution.

• Clarifies that the $50 cap on cash/cashier's check contributions is an aggregated cap per candidate/committee per election.

May 19, 2011

Provides the parameters for expenditures by candidates and political committees.

• Eliminates the requirement that a candidate or political
committee include in its filing with the Division a list ofall
authorized debit card users and the card's expiration date.
• Adds that a candidate who makes a loan to the campaign does not have to wait until the campaign is over to be reimbursed; instead, the candidate may be reimbursed by the campaign at any time the campaign has sufficient fimds to repay the loan and satisfY its other obligations.

May 19, 20ll

Provides how a candidate can dispose ofsurplus funds after a campaign including donating funds to the candidate's registered political party (a maximum of $5,000 to the party or, in the case of a Florida senate candidate, no more than $30,000).

• Removes the caps on the amount of post-campaign surplus funds that a candidate may give to the candidate's political party.

May 19, 2011

Provides the requirements for political disclaimers which apply regardless ofwhetbet the candidate is partisan, non-partisan, or a write-in candidate.

• Creates a specific political advertising disclaimer for write-in candidates, which is essentially distinct from other partisan candidate disclaimers in that the words "write-in candidate"
inst~d of the phrase "party affiiiation" must follow the n;m;e of
the write-in candidate.

• Specifies the disclaimer for political ads made as an in-kind contribution from a political party.

May 19, 2011

• Revises disclaimer for joint endorsement political advertisements.

• Provides that a political advertisement paid for by a candidate need not expressly indicate that the ad was approved by the candidate.

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

23

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 25 of 27 PageID 295

'SeCtion
67 6S 69 70

Statute/Law '
106.1437 I06.I7 106.19 106.25

of Status of law prior to em!ctive date change ·, ..
Provides parameters for miscellaneous advertisements (those intended to influence public policy or the vote ofa public official and those do not otherwise a political ad, independent expenditure, or electioneering communication) which includes clearly designating the sponsor. Allows candidate polls and surveys to be conducted.

···changeto'law, ·..

··.·

·.... ,.·

.·.·

•.· .<:

• Provides that political advertisements paid for by a political party or affiliated party committee may use names and abbreviations registered with the Department of State in the
disclaimer.

• States that a non-partisan candidate is prohibited from campaigning based on party affiliation.

• Adds that although a political ad for a nonpartisan candidate cannot refer to the candidate's political party, it can refer to the candidate's partisan-related experience.

• States that an expenditure made for, or in furtherance of, a miscellaneous advertisement is neither a contribution to or on behalfofa candidate and does not constitute an independent
expenditure.

• Authorizes political party committees to conduct political polls for the purpose of detennining the viability ofpotential
candidates.

Prohibits certain activities by candidates, political committees and those persons or entities connected with campaigns that could subject the person or entity to civil and/or criminal penalties.
Provides the authority of and the process for the Florida Elections Commission to investigate complaints or violations ofchapters 104 and 106, Florida Statutes.

• Allows the results of the poll to be shared with potential candidates and provides that expenditures relating to such polls are not considered contributions to the potential candidates.

Expressly states that a candidate's failure to comply with the requirements ofchapter 106, Florida Statutes, does not affect whether the candidate has qualified for office.

• Provides a respondent 14 days to file a response to an initial

complaint before the commission's executive director may

determine the legal sufficiency ofthe complaint

• Expressly prohibits the Commission from adopting by rule any determination of what constitutes "willfulness" or defining the

term "willful"

• Allows a respondent to enter into a consent order with the

Commission

without

having

to

admit
-······

to

any

violation
-

of

law

Eff~Date .
May 19, 20ll
May 19,
2011 May 19, 20ll
May 19, 2011

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

24

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 26 of 27 PageID 296

r'Seeti
71 72
73
74
75
76

tC!L:iw
106.26 106.265
106.29 10635 112.312 I 12.3215

Status oflaw prior'to effective date'of'cha:nie

Changtito Jaw ·•· ·.

.· •.:•..•.••...• •·: •. ·.... >•·.···•· ...::··:··

within the commission's jurisdiction.

i, \: .. .Err. Date ·:

• Clarifies that a person alleged to have committed a violation of chapter 104 or 106, Florida Statutes has the right to a formal administrative hearing conducted by an administrative lawjudge in the Division of Administrative Hearings.
• Authorizes the administrative law judge to impose civil penalties in a formal administrative hearing.

Sets forth the Florida Elections Commissioners' powers

• Adds that if the commission files a complaint against a witness who fails to respond to a subpoena, the complaint must be filed in the circuit court where the witness resides.

May 19, 2011

Authorizes the Florida Elections Commission to impose civil penalties for violations of chapters 104 and 106, Florida Statutes.

• Authorizes administrative law judge to impose civil penalties
when a case is referred to the Division ofAdministrative
Hearings. • Clarifies that electioneering communications organizations are
also subject to civil penalties. • Clarifies that the fines assessed go to the General Revenue Fund
in lieu of the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund.

May 19, 20II

Requires state and county executive committees of political parties to file regular reports of all contributions and expenditures in accordance with the same filing deadlines as those imposed on candictates.
Sets late filing fees and process for notifying the committee and for payment.
Provides for restrictions and expenditures on contributions and expenditures, and penalties. Provides for the distribution offunds from the Election Campaign Financing TruSt Fund.

• Expressly excludes political parties from reporting contributions and expenditures that are reported to the Federal Election Commission.
• Requires political party committees to flle campaign tre.asurers' reports for any contributions or expenditures made to influence the results ofa special election or preceding special primary election held to fill a vacancy in office.
• Adds that written notice to the chair ofthe committee of late filing is deemed complete upon proof of delivery to the mailing or street address on record with the filing officer.
• Eliminates superfluous requirements for printed copies of campaign treasurer's reports that are already filed electronicallv.

May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011

Provides for defmitions ofterms used in Part III of chapter 112, Florida Statutes, relating to the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees.
Sets parameters for lobbying before the executive

• Excludes from the definition of«Gift" contributions or expenditures that are reported pursuant to federal law.
• Excludes from the definition of<'Expenditure" contribution

May 19, 2011
19,

DOJ Preclearan~ Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

25

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-7 Filed 07/27/12 Page 27 of 27 PageID 297

77

&76.05

7&

876.07

Status oflaw. riorto·effectivedate.of.Ciiari e
Provides the requisite oath to be completed by current and new public employees.
Provides that a candidate who refuses to file the public employee oath does not qualifY for public office imd the name cannot be placed on the ballot

• Excludes the requirement for candidates for public office from having to execute the public employee oath because they are not public em loyees unless and until they are elected.

May 19, 2011

• Repeals this provision. Cf Section 77 of chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida, amending s.
876JJ5, Florida Statutes.

. May 19, 2011

• Provides a severability clause.

• Provides that the bill takes effect upon becoming law (Signed by Governor Scott on May 19,2011).

DOJ Preclearance Submission for Elections Law, Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida

26.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-8 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID 298
Exhibit 2d

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-8 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID 299
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division

TCH:RSB:RPL:ESS:TAL:tst DJ 166-012-3 2011-2187

Voting Sect/on - NWB 950 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW Washington, DC 20530

August 8, 2011

The Honorable Kurt S. Browning Secretary of State 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

Dear Secretary Browning:

This refers to Chapter 2011-40, Laws of Florida (CS/CS/HB 1355), which amends numerous provisions of the Florida Election Code and other Florida Statutes, submitted to the Attorney General pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973c. We received your submission on June 9, 2011; additional information was received through July 29, 2011.

Your July 29, 2011, letter withdraws Sections 4, 23, 26, and 39 of Chapter 2011-40 from Section 5 review. Accordingly, no determination by the Attorney General is required concerning these provisions. Procedures for the Administration of Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act of 1965, 28 C.F.R. 51.25(a). Your letter advises that the State of Florida has instead filed a declaratory judgment action under Section 5 concerning Sections 4, 23, 26, and 39 of Chapter 2011-40 in the District Court for the District of Columbia.

The Attorney General does not interpose any objection to the remaining changes contained in the legislation. However, we note that Section 5 expressly provides that the failure ofthe Attorney General to object does not bar subsequent litigation to enjoin the enforcement of the changes. 28 C.F .R. 51.41.

Chapter 2011-40 includes provisions that are enabling in nature. Therefore, any changes atiecting voting that are adopted pursuant to this legislation will be subject to Section 5 review. 28 C.F.R. 51.15.
W d t - ~incerely, ~ T. Christian Herren, Jr. Chief, Voting Section

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-9 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID 300
Exhibit 3

Collier elections chief: Voter roll review already under way will continue : Naples Daily .. . Page 1 of 2
Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-9 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID 301
S1NV Read more at nap!esmnMs.corn
Collier elections chief: Voter roll review already under way will continue
By JENNA BUZZACCO-FOERSTER Thursday, June "7, 2012
NAPLES- Collier County's elections chief said Thursday her office won't halt its effort to identify and purge noncitizens from voter registration rolls despite a request from the federal government to Florida elections officials to do just that. Collier Supervisor of Elections Jennifer Edwards said the staff already has sent out letters to 27 registered voters - 10 of which have been removed from the voter rolls identified in the state search, and now are just waiting to hear back about their status. The decision to continue the process comes about a week after federal officials sent Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner a letter demanding the state end the search for noncitizen voters. The request- made by T. Christian Herren, voting section chief for the Department of Justice- claimed Florida's purge violates federal antidiscrimination and voter registration laws. Florida began looking for noncitizens on its voter rolls last year by comparing driver license information to voter registration lists. An initial search showed that as many as 182,000 registered voters may not be citizens. State officials sent out an initial list of more than 2,600 names earlier this year and asked county election officials to verify the information and remove ineligible voters. But Herren in his letter wrote that the state's procedures to identify noncitizens hasn't been reviewed to make sure it isn't discriminatory. Florida must secure approval for changes in voting procedures because five counties- including Collier- still are covered by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Edwards said state law outlines the procedure for maintaining registration records, and as such the policy is in compliance. "It's already been pre-cleared," she said. Lee County elections officials couldn't be reached for comment Thursday. _The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2012/jun/07/elections-supervisor-collier-voter-registrati... 7/20/2012

Collier elCecatsieon8s:1c2h-icevf-:0V12o9t4e-rJrDoWll -rMevAiPewDaolrceuamdyenutn2d2e-r9waFyilewdil0l7c/o2n7/t1in2ueP:aNgeap3leosf 3DPaialyge.I.D. 30P2age 2 of 2
http :I/www.naplesnews.com/news/20 12/jun/07/elections-supervisor-collier-voter-registrati... 7/20/2012

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-10 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID 303
Exhibit 4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-10 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID 304 U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Voting Section - NWB 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20530
May 31,2012
The Honorable Ken Detzner Florida Secretary of State Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building · 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250
Dear Secretary Detzner:
This refers to certain new procedures that the State of Florida has recently iinplemented to attempt to verify the eligibility ofregistered voters. Specifically, we understand that the . Florida Secretary of State is working in coordination with the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV") to identify registered voters for possible removal from the Florida Vot~r Registration System ("FVRS"). Based on recent news reports, public
a comments by state and local officials, and our review of Florida Department of State training
presentation, it appears tha:t Florida is seeking.(!) to verify voter registration records in FVRS against databases maintained by DHSMV, as well as possibly other agencies, for purposes of identifying potentially ineligible voters based on citizenship, and (2) to distribute the results of this matching process to county supervisors of elections for further action, including possible removal of registered voters from the voter rolls. News reports and other information, including a press release from your office, indicate thatthis procedure has been initiated and is ongoing.
The practice described above appears to be differentfrom the benchmark practice .currently in force or effect in the five covered counties in Florida subject to the requirements of ·Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act. 42 U.S.C. 1973c.
Our records do not reflect that these changes affecting voting have been submitted to the . United States District Court for the District of Columbia for judicialreview or to the Attorney General for administrative review as required by Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act. 42 U.S.C. 1973c(a). Accordingly, it is necessary that they either be brought before that court or submitted to the Attorney General for a determination that they neither have the purpose nor will have the effect of discriminating on accoll!lt of race, color, or membership in a language minority group under Section 5. Changes that affect voting are legally unenforceable in the five covered .
counties unless and until the requisite determination under Section 5 has been obtained. Clark v.
Roemer, 500 U.S. 646 (1991). Should you desire to make an administrative submission ofthese changes under Section 5, please refer to file number 2012-:3250 in your response so that it may be channeled correctly.
We also note that the State of Florida, as a whole, is subject to the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 ("NVRA"), 42 U.S.C.1973gg-.1973gg-10. Section 8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-10 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID 305
of the NVRA provides the standards for conducting list maintenance for voter registration lists used for elections for federal office. We have a shared interest in ensuring that the NVRA's goal of maintaining accurate and current registration rolls for federal elections is met. At the same time, Section 8 oftheNVRA reflects Congress's determination that list maintenance efforts must also be conducted within an appropriate time period, and in a uniform and non-discriminatory manner.
In particular, Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the NVRA provides that "[a] State shall complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters." 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(c)(2)(A). Further, Section 8(b)(1) of the NVRA provides that programs and activities aimed at "ensuring the maintenance of an accurate and current voter registration roll" shall be "uniform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ...." 42 U.S. C. ·1973gg-6(b)(1 ). The practice described above appears to be a program to systematically remove the names of potentially ineligible voters from the official list of eligible voters within the meaning of Section 8 of the NVRA, and does not appear to fall within any ofthe exceptions allowed within the 90 day period before a federal election. Because Florida's primary election for federal office is August 14, 2012, that 90 day period began on May 16, 2012. As a consequence, the practice appears to violate the NVRA.
To enable us to meet our responsibility to enforce federal law, please inform us by June 6 of the action that the State of Florida plans to take concerning the matters discussed in this letter. Specifically, please advise whether the State intends to cease the practice discussed above, so that the Department can determine what further action, if any, is necessary. If you have any questions, please call Voting Section attorney Elise Sandra Shore at 202-305-0070.
cc: Attorney General Pam Bondi Daniel Nordby, Esq.
2·

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-11 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 28 PageID 306
Exhibit 5

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2Poafg2e81Poafg2e7ID 307

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

JOSE MORALES, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated,

Plaintiff,
v.
KAREN HANDEL, in her official capacity as Georgia Secretary of State,

CIVIL CASE NO. 1:OSMCVM31 72
ThreeMjudge court (SFB, JTC, WSD)

Defendant.

ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

"No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined." Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 17, 84 S. Ct. 526, 535 (1964).
Accordingly, "[e]very voter ... , whether he votes for a candidate with

little chance of winning or for one with little chance of losing, has a right

under the Constitution to have his vote fairly counted, without its being distorted by fraudulently cast votes." Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211, 227, 94 S. Ct. 2253, 2263-64 (1974). "The right to vote freely for the candidate of one's choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government.

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 3Poafg2e82Poafg2e7ID 308
And the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen's vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise." Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555, 84 S. Ct. 1362, 1378 (1964).
"Confidence in the integrity of our electoral processes is essential to the functioning of our participatory democracy. Voter fraud drives honest citizens out of the democratic process and breeds distrust of our government. Voters who fear their legitimate votes will be outweighed by fraudulent ones will feel disenfranchised." Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1, 3, 127 S. Ct. 5, 7 (2006).
"[T]he electoral system cannot inspire public confidence if no safeguards exist to deter or detect fraud or to confirm the identity of voters." Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., 553 U.S.- ,128 S. Ct. 1610, 1620 (2008) (quotation marks and citation omitted) (noting that "public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process has independent significance, because it encourages citizen participation in the democratic process"). II. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jose Morales (alternatively "Plaintiff' or "Morales") resides in Cherokee County, Georgia and became a naturalized United States citizen in November 2007. He is a registered student at Kennesaw State University. Morales obtained his Georgia driver's license in 2006, prior to becoming a
2

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 4Poafg2e83Poafg2e7ID 309
U.S. citizen. In September 2008, he completed a voter registration application on campus.
Thereafter, Morales received a letter dated 19 September 2008 from the Cherokee County Elections and Registration ("County Registrar") office. Citing procedures set out in the Georgia Election Code, the letter informed Morales that he was required to provide verification of his citizenship. On 26 September 2008, the County Registrar's office sent Morales a second letter stating that he might not be qualified to vote because his citizenship status was unclear. Morales was advised in the letter that a hearing had been scheduled for 15 October 2008 to determine his qualifications. At some time on 26 September 2008, Morales appeared at the County Registrar's office where he presented his passport as evidence of his United States citizenship. The passport was accepted as verification and the next day, 27 September 2008, the voter registration records were changed to indicate Morales was eligible and registered to vote. A short time later, Morales received his voter registration card. On 10 October 2008, a letter was sent to Morales advising him that his 15 October 2008 hearing had been cancelled and informing him "YOU WILL BE ALLOWED TO VOTE."
On 9 October 2008, after Morales had received his voter registration card but the day before the 10 October 2008 letter was sent confirming his
3

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 5Poafg2e84Poafg2e7ID 310
eligibility and registration to vote, Morales filed this lawsuit with the district
court seeking a temporary restraining order ("TR0")1 and preliminary
injunction against Georgia's Secretary of State, Karen Handel ("the
Secretary"). Morales's claim for the TRO was based upon Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act of 1965.2 Section 5 prohibits certain states with a specified
history of voting discrimination from enacting or administering a change in
existing voting practice or procedure without first receiving "preclearance"
from the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") or the United States
1 Morales requested a temporary restraining order specifically directing the Georgia Secretary of State to: (1) cease using any citizenship data derived from the Department of Driver Services' database; (2) direct all county boards of elections to cease using any lists derived from that citizenship data as the basis for voter challenges, correspondences, hearings, or removals; (3) direct all county boards to immediately send letters rescinding previous correspondences based on the database matching lists; (4) report any county that refuses to comply; and (5) rescind the Secretary's prior 24 September 2008 memorandum on absentee voter procedures. (Campi.,, A-C.)
2 Morales also based his claim on alleged violations of the National Voter Registration Act ("NVRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg et seq.. As a three-judge court convened pursuant to Section 5, we are only required to address claims under that section, though we could hear related claims as well. See Allee v. Medrano, 416 U.S. 802, 812, 94 S. Ct. 2191, 2198 (1974) (noting that a threejudge court could hear claims ancillary to those for which a three-judge court was statutorily required, even if those ancillary claims would not otherwise be heard by such a court). Although the court received evidence and heard argument on the NVRA claim at the 22 October hearing, we exercise our discretion not to address that claim, which will instead be decided by a singlejudge court. See White v. Alabama, 851 F. Supp. 427, 429 (finding it proper for a three-judge court to sever non-Section 5 claims for resolution by a singlejudge court).
4

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 6Poafg2e85Poafg2e7ID 311
District Court for the District of Columbia. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973c, as amended Qy Pub. L. 109-246, 120 Stat. 577 (2006). The State of Georgia is subject to the requirements of Section 5. See id.; 28 C.F.R. app. § 51. Preclearance is necessary to ensure that a voting change "neither has the purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color." 42 U.S. C. § 1973c.
In this case, the "change" in voting practice or procedure alluded to concerns Georgia's attempt to comply with the provisions of the Help America Vote Act ("HAVA")3, passed by Congress in 2002, which requires the Secretary to maintain a statewide database of registered voters.4 One of the two principal purposes of HAVA is to prevent voter fraud, and the Act requires that the Secretary create a system to verify the information on voter registration applications by matching the registration information against the State's Department of Driver Services ("DDS") database and the Social Security Administration ("SSA") database. See 42 U.S.C. § 15483; Florida
3 HAVA recognizes the fundamental requirement of United States citizenship to vote in federal elections by specifically providing, in the new mail-in ballot procedures, for the requirement that mail-in ballots include the question: "Are you a citizen of the United States of America?" 42 U.S.C. § 15483(b)(4)(A)(i).
4 The Georgia Election Code provides that the Secretary of State is responsible for coordinating the obligations of the State under HAVA. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-50.
5

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 7Poafg2e86Poafg2e7ID 312
State Conf. of the NAACP v. Browning, 522 F.3d 1153, 1168 (11th Cir. 2008). When Morales's voter registration information was matched with the information in the DDS and SSA databases, the match results indicated that Morales might not be a citizen. Because he was "flagged" in the database, the County Registrar sent him the 19 September 2008 letter requiring him to verify his citizenship.5
On 16 October 2008 the Chief Judge of this court entered an order denying Plaintiffs requested TRO. He found that no specific irreparable harm would occur before the three-judge court convened to warrant entry of the requested TRO. In considering the harm to the Secretary should such a TRO be granted, the court concluded that it was necessary to allow for further development of the factual record. The court also concluded that granting the requested TRO would effectively prevent the Secretary and those acting in concert with her, specifically the 159 county registrars and their companion election boards, from removing fraudulent or disqualified voters from the voting lists. Such inability was found to significantly injure and diminish the public's respect for, and confidence in, the electoral process. Also, the court,
5 It appears that Morales was flagged in the database because he did not become a citizen until after he obtained his driver's license. Morales became a naturalized citizen on 7 November 2007. In Georgia, an applicant for a driver's license indicates whether he is or is not a U.S. citizen.
6

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 8Poafg2e87Poafg2e7ID 313
in weighing the interests of the parties, concluded that the Secretary's ability to maintain reliable voter lists was paramount to the temporary and minor inconvenience to those individuals whose eligibility had been questioned on the grounds of citizenship. Finally, the court opined that the temporary relief sought by Plaintiff would likely lead to significant voter confusion.
This case involves a complex area of the law that is freighted with significance given its timing and nature. As such, a clear understanding of the competing interests before us is in order. First, we sketch the contours of the current voting process in Georgia.
A. Registration Under both the Georgia Constitution and provisions within the Georgia election code, a person must be a citizen of the United States to register and vote in Georgia. Ga. Canst. art. II, § I, , II; O.C.G.A. §§ 21·2·216(a)(2), 21·2· 220(b). To register to vote in Georgia, a person must be at least eighteen years old and a resident of the county in which he or she seeks to vote. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-216. A "resident" of Georgia is defined under the state's motor vehicle code as either a United States citizen or an alien with legal authorization from the U.S. government for his or her residency. Id. § 40-51(15). Only Georgia residents may obtain either a driver's license or an identification card from the DDS. Id. §§ 40-5-20(a), 40-5-100(a).
7

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 9Poafg2e88Poafg2e7ID 314
A person can apply to register as an elector6 in person through the DDS, the Department of Natural Resources, other designated offices or by mail-in voter registration application. ld. § 21-2-220. It is important to note that Georgia has no statutory framework within which same-day registration and voting can take place. A person who applies to register to vote for the first time in Georgia is not "registered" to vote at the time he or she submits a voter registration application to one of the 159 county registrars. The person is only "registered'' once eligibility has been established. Georgia law provides that a county board of registrars has the right and duty to examine the qualifications to be an elector in the county. ld. § 21-2-228. The Georgia Election Code further provides that a board of registrars may hold a hearing, upon three days written notice, to examine the qualification or disqualification of applicants or electors and may require the production of documents and subpoena witnesses. Id. If a board of registrars determines that a person is not qualified to register or remain registered to vote, the individual is provided written notice of that decision and may appeal that decision to the Superior Court. ld. § 21-2-228(e, f).
6 The term "elector" under Georgia law means a person registered to vote. ld. § 21-2-216(a).
8

Case 8C:1a2s-ecv1-:0182-c9v4--0J3D1W72-M-JATCP-WDSoDcu-SmFeBnt 2D2o-c1u1meFnitle3d607F/2ile7d/1120/2P7a/g0e8 10Paogf e289Poaf g2e7ID 315
B. Voting In Georgia, votes are cast using either a direct reporting electronic machine ("DRE machine") or a paper ballot. Votes that are cast via the DRE machine are final, cannot be retrieved, and the vote of a particular elector cannot be identified after the DRE vote is cast. There are three kinds of paper ballots - "absentee ballots," "provisional ballots," and "challenged ballots." An absentee ballot is mailed to a registered elector upon request. The elector then votes the ballot, places it in an envelope, signs an oath printed on the envelope, places that envelope inside another envelope and mails the whole package back to the registrar any time before the day of the election. ld. § 21·2·385(a). Provisional ballots look exactly like absentee ballots but are used for different purposes. ld. § 21·2·419(a). Provisional ballots are provided to individuals who present themselves at a polling place on election day and claim to be registered electors, but whose names do not appear on the official list of registered electors. Id. § 21·2·418(a). The provisional ballots, once voted, are placed in colored envelopes to differentiate them from other types of paper ballots and then placed in a separate, secure ballot box. ld. § 21·2· 419(a). A registrar has forty·eight hours after the election to determine whether those casting the provisional ballots had, in fact, registered to vote.
9

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P1aogfe2180Poafg2e7ID 316
Id. § 21-2-419(c). There is no right to appeal the refusal to count provisional ballots.
Challenged ballots mirror absentee and provisional ballots in appearance. However, challenged ballots are provided only to those individuals whose status as a registered elector is challenged by either the registrar or another citizen. Id. § 21-2-230. If practicable, registrars are directed to clear up any challenges prior to election day. If an eligibility issue cannot be resolved in that time, the challenged individuals are permitted to cast a "challenged" ballot. The Georgia election code requires registrars to resolve all challenged ballots prior to the certification of the election results. Id. Written notice is then provided to the challenged elector indicating whether the challenge was successful. If the challenge is successful, the elector may then appeal that decision to a Superior Court. Id. An appeal does not delay the certification process. Id. §§ 21-2-229(e), 21-2-230. III. LEGAL STANDARDS
A. Jurisdiction At the hearing on 22 October 2008, the members of the court inquired of all parties as to whether, in light of Morales having secured a voting card and the assurances of his registrar (and the Secretary of State) that he would be allowed to vote, there remained Article III standing. Essentially, the court
10

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P2aogfe2181Poafg2e7ID 317
wondered aloud if the case were moot, given that the sole plaintiff in the controversy had achieved complete relief. While the complaint seeks relief for those "similarly situated" to Morales, there are no class allegations in this complaint and recognition of a class has not been pressed or adjudicated. A review of the pertinent precedents reveals that our jurisdiction here is a thorny issue not easily resolved.
Morales, based upon the voluntary action by his registrar, reinforced by in·court assurances from the Secretary that he will be able to cast his vote, appears to have achieved the relief he sought for himself when he filed this action. Clearly, at the time of the filing of this action the court had Article III jurisdiction -that point is not at issue. It is the subsequent, voluntary actions by the Secretary and other election officials in response to Morales' efforts to establish his eligibility that have occasioned a suggestion of mootness. However, it should be stressed that Morales challenged, and held an individual right to do so, the lack of preclearance as to the changes in the electoral process caused by Georgia's compliance with HAVA.
We conclude that this case, under the unique facts before us, satisfies an exception to the mootness doctrine in that the injury complained of viz Section 5 constitutes a "wrong capable of repetition, yet evading review." Southern Pac. Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498, 515, 31 S. Ct. 279, 283
11

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P3aogfe2182Poafg2e7ID 318
(1911). As long as Georgia's system for compiling the databases "remains and controls future elections[,]" Moore v. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814, 816, 89 S. Ct. 1493, 1494 (1969), we think the exception as outlined by the Supreme Court in a range of cases starting with Southern Pacific and running through Morse v. Republican Party ofVirginia, 517 U.S. 186, 116 S. Ct. 1186 (1996), applies.7
First, the injury at bar appears to be of a type likely to befall the plaintiff again. If Morales undertakes one of the actions that would cause his eligibility to be questioned by reference to the databases at issue, there is a "reasonable expectation that ... [he] would be subjected to the same action again." Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149, 96 S. Ct. 347, 348-49 (1975). Second, the injury here is of inherently limited duration and is likely to always become moot before federal court litigation is completed. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. at 816.
Our circuit also has addressed this well-established exception to the mootness doctrine. We have held that "[t]his exception allows a court to reach the merits of a case which is otherwise moot if (1) there is a reasonable expectation or a demonstrated probability that the same controversy will
7 In Morse, the Court observed: "Like other cases challenging electoral practices, therefore, this controversy is not moot because it is capable of repetition, yet evading review." Morse v. Republican Party ofVa., 517 U.S. at 235 n.48, 116 S. Ct. at 1213 (quotation marks omitted) (emphasis added).
12

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P4aogfe2183Poafg2e7ID 319
recur involving the same complaining party, and (2) the challenged action was in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration." Brooks v. Georgia State Bd. of Elections, 59 F.3d 1114, 1120 (11th Cir. 1995).
Here, given the strong public interest in maintaining confidence in the electoral process, the voluntary nature of the actions undertaken to provide temporal relief to Morales in response to the citizenship evidence he submitted, the ability of the Secretary or other election officials (i.e., the 159 county voter registrars in Georgia) to resume the process and procedures challenged, and the press of time involved in the election cycle, the court is persuaded that the exception to the mootness doctrine exists. The Secretary also concedes Morales and a few thousand other voter applicants were subject to the citizenship verification procedures he now challenges even though Morales himself was cleared to vote. Accordingly, we have proceeded to rule on this case within the parameters discussed below.
B. Voting Rights Act Congress passed the Voting Rights Act in 1965 to end the practice of racial discrimination in voting in various Southern states, including Georgia. See South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 315, 329-30, 86 S. Ct. 803, 812, 819 (1966). Section 5 of the Act assists in achieving this goal by
13

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P5aogfe2184Poafg2e7ID 320
"suspend[ing] new voting regulations pending scrutiny by federal authorities to determine whether their use would violate the Fifteenth Amendment." Id. at 334, 86 S. Ct. at 822. All changes in the voting process of a covered state would have to be precleared by the Department of Justice in order for that state to implement it, "so long as those changes reflect policy choices made by state or local officials." Young v. Fordice, 520 U.S. 273, 284, 117 S. Ct. 1228, 1235-36 (1997); see also Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U.S. 544, 566, 89 S. Ct. 817, 832 (1969) (noting that ((Congress intended to reach any state enactment which altered the election law of a covered State in even a minor way").
The Supreme Court has separated cases involving preclearance issues into two categories - "substantive discrimination" questions and "coverage" questions. Id. at 559, 89 S. Ct. at 828. ((Substantive discrimination" cases involve the issue of whether a change has the "purpose or effect" of infringing on the right to vote based on race or color. Perkins v. Matthews, 400 U.S. 379, 384-85, 91 S. Ct. 431, 435 (1971). Only the Attorney General and the United States District Court for the District of Columbia have the authority to make preclearance decisions in such cases. See id. Accordingly, states making substantive changes to their voting procedures must either seek a declaratory judgment from the District Court for the District of Columbia or
14

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P6aogfe2185Poafg2e7ID 321
submit materials describing the change to the Attorney General. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973c; Morris v. Gressette, 432 U.S. 491, 502, 97 S. Ct. 2411, 2419 (1977). The state would be permitted to implement the changes under the latter alternative if "it has (i) filed a complete submission with the Attorney General, and (ii) received no objection from that office within 60 days."8 Morris, 432 U.S. at 502, 97 S. Ct. at 2419.
"Coverage" questions, on the other hand, involve the preliminary question of "whether a particular state enactment is subject to the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and therefore must be submitted for approval before enforcement." Allen, 393 U.S. at 558-59, 89 S. Ct. at 828. A private party, as well as the United States, has standing to "seek a declaratory judgment that a new state enactment is governed by § 5,'' and, if "the State has failed to submit the covered enactment for§ 5 approval, the private party has standing to obtain an injunction against further enforcement, pending the State's submission of the [covered enactment] pursuant to§ 5." Id. at 555, 89 S. Ct. at 826; see also 42 U.S.C. § 1973j(d), (f). All such actions must be heard by three-judge district courts, in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.
8 Under this standard, the Attorney General would not have to affirmatively approve the change, rather he only must not have issued an objection to it. See Morris, 432 U.S. at 502, 97 S. Ct. at 2419.
15

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P7aogfe2186Poafg2e7ID 322
§ 2284, the decisions of which would be immediately appealable to the Supreme Court. See 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a).
The present dispute involves a coverage action brought against a state subject to the preclearance requirements of Section 5. In addressing whether a Section 5 violation has occurred, we engage in a three-step analysis. See Lopez v. Monterey County. Cal., 519 U.S. 9, 23, 117 S. Ct. 340, 349 (1996). First, we must determine whether the state's enactment constitutes a change covered under Section 5. See id. Second, if the action does constitute a change, we then look at whether the state has satisfied the requirements for Section 5 approval. See id. Finally, if the approval requirements have not been met, we then must determine "what temporary remedy, if any, is appropriate" until such time as preclearance is obtained or the proposed change abandoned. ld.
In order to evaluate whether a practice constitutes a "change" under Section 5, we must compare it to the "baseline" for that coverage jurisdiction. See Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S.-, 128 S. Ct. 1970, 1982 (2008). The "baseline" would be "the most recent practice that was both precleared and in force or effect." ld. (quotation marks and citation omitted). After determining this baseline, we then must look at "whether a State has enact[ed] or is seek[ing] to administer a practice or procedure that is different
16

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P8aogfe2187Poafg2e7ID 323
enough from the baseline to qualify as a change." See id. (quotation marks and citation omitted).
C. Help America Vote Act of 2002 As previously noted, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002, 42 U.S.C. § 15301 et seq., as part of an effort to reform federal election administration. See Browning, 522 F.3d at 1155. Under HAVA, states are required to establish and maintain a centralized computerized voter registration list that contains the name and registration information for every legally registered voter in that state. See 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a). Each registered voter in the list must be assigned a unique identification number. See id. § 15483(a)(1)(A)(iii). HAVA also imposes a series of voter verification requirements on states, thereby limiting their ability to accept and process applications for voter registration. When an individual fills out such an application, she is required to provide either her driver's license number or the last four digits of her Social Security number. See id. § 15483(a)(5)(A)(i). If she does not have one, the state must assign her a unique identifying number, which should be the same as the one used for her entry in the computerized list. See id. § 15483(a)(5)(A)(ii). For all new applicants, HAVA gives states the discretion to decide on the appropriate standards for evaluating, in accordance with
17

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 1P9aogfe2188Poafg2e7ID 324
state law, whether an applicant provided sufficient and valid information to meet the statute's requirements. See id. § 15483(a)(5)(A)(iii). As part of the voter verification process, HAVA requires the chief state election official, here the Secretary, to enter into an agreement with the official in charge of the state motor vehicle authority. See id. § 15483(a)(5)(B)(i). Under the terms of such an agreement, information from the statewide voter registration system would be matched with that contained in the motor vehicle authority's database, though only to the extent needed to permit the assessment of the accuracy of the information contained on the registration applications. See id. The motor vehicle authority must enter into a similar agreement with the Commissioner of Social Security, which would cover those situations in which no driver's license number was provided. See id. §§ 405(r)(8), 15483(a)(5)(B)(ii).
Georgia only began to comply with the voter verification provisions of HAVA in March of 2007, when the Secretary entered into an informationsharing agreement with the DDS.9 Under this agreement, DDS verifies the
9 Until 2006, Georgia believed itself to be exempted from these requirements based on 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(5)(D), which exempts states which are permitted to request applicants to provide their full nine-digit Social Security numbers. A 2006 court order forbade the use of complete Social Security numbers, in response to which Georgia agreed to follow the HAVA scheme pursuant to a consent decree. See Schwier v. Cox, 439 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 2006).
18

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P0aogfe2189Poafg2e7ID 325
following fields from registration applications: driver's license number, last name, first name, date of birth, last four digits of Social Security number, and citizenship status. DDS has also entered into an agreement with the SSA, pursuant to which the SSA will verify the accuracy of the following fields from the applications: forename/surname, date of birth, last four digits of Social Security number, and whether the individual is deceased.
As part of its compliance with HAVA's requirements, Georgia has created a voter registration database, which contains the information from all applicants. All newly inputted information is transmitted to the DDS every week night in order for DDS to conduct the HAVA verification process. DDS sends this information on to the SSA. The next business day, the results of DDS and SSA verification are available to county registrars, who can access the information either by looking up an individual applicant in the database or by requesting a county-wide compilation report. If the data verification process could not verify that the applicant was a United States citizen, then the registrar would be made aware of the discrepancy. This would occur either by "NON-CITIZEN" or "N" being displayed in flashing red letters on the screen when that applicant's registration entry is displayed or by a
19

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P1aogfe2280Poafg2e7ID 326
notation on the compilation report. 10 If a registrar receives this information, the Secretary has suggested, but cannot require, that the registrar treat the application in the manner prescribed under Sections 21-2-226 and 21-2-228 of the Georgia Election Code for challenging the vote. In the absence of clear guidance from the Secretary, registrars for the 159 counties in Georgia could conceivably adopt a range of disparate methodologies for resolving these discrepancies. 11 At the time of the 22 October hearing, these voter verification processes had identified 50,378 applications with potential data mismatches in any of the listed categories, 4538 of which involved questions of citizenship.12
10 Based on the record and responses at the 22 October 2008 hearing, it appears that the registrars would be similarly notified if any of the other fields could not be verified. However, questionable citizenship is the only one that would produce a flashing red light on the computer screen.
11 Many registrars appear to have dispatched letters to potential ineligible voters, as occurred with Morales. They could also have adopted other methods, such as calling those applicants, visiting their reported addresses, or performing general research into birth records and so on.
12 The vast majority of these came from applications involving individuals trying to register for the first time - 3821 of the 4538 citizenship mismatches and 47,190 of the 50,378 total mismatches. At the time of the hearing, Georgia had processed and submitted for verification more than 550,000 registration applications.
20

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P2aogfe2281Poafg2e7ID 327
IV. DISCUSSION The changes Georgia adopted as a result of HAVA must be compared
against the Section 5 baseline in order to determine if they constitute a change that should have been precleared. According to the DOJ13, the appropriate baseline would be the system Georgia had in place at the time HAVA was adopted. At that point in time, the state did not have an automated system for verifying registration applicant information nor any standards for operating that system. Given this baseline, there are at least two features of Georgia's post~HAVA system that constitute changes that require preclearance. One is the comparison of information in the DDS and SSA databases that results in the identification of applicants whose eligibility could not be verified. The other is the disparate methodologies employed by registrars in attempting to evaluate, notify and qualify potential ineligible voters. 14 Though these could both be characterized as exercises of local discretion, permitted under federal and state law, in response to the federal mandate of HAVA, this does not shield them from review under Section 5. See Young, 520 U.S. at 284, 117 S. Ct. at 1235-36 (noting that preclearance is
13 The DOJ requested to participate in this action as amicus curie and, by agreement of the parties and the court, was permitted to do so.
14 The Court implies no ruling on whether the 159 local registrars must seek preclearance under Section 5.
21

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P3aogfe2282Poafg2e7ID 328
required, even when "the changes are made in an effort to comply with federal law"). The two changes which were implemented by the State and its county registrars reflect policy choices requiring preclearance under Section 5.
Accordingly, since Georgia has failed to preclear either of these changes, we find it to have committed a technical violation of Section 5. Though the Secretary has not conceded that she should have sought preclearance for these changes, we note that the State has filed for preclearance of its new procedures in response to an 8 October 2008 letter from the Department of Justice as well as the initiation of this suit. To date, the State appears to be cooperating fully with the Attorney General and DOJ's requests in the preclearance evaluation. V. REMEDY
This challenged automated voter verification process is a change affecting voting that is covered by the preclearance requirements of Section 5. See Young, 520 U.S. 273, 117 S. Ct. 1228. The Secretary has implemented this automated voter verification process without first obtaining preclearance under Section 5 from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the Attorney General of the United States.
22

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P4aogfe2283Poafg2e7ID 329
The Secretary now has submitted to the Attorney General this automated voter verification process for review under Section 5, and that submission remains pending.
Because the Secretary is currently implementing an unprecleared voting change covered by Section 5, and because there is an imminent federal general election occurring on 4 November 2008, temporary injunctive relief is required under Section 5, to remain in effect unless and until preclearance is obtained by the Secretary. Accordingly, the court will grant the Plaintiffs request for a preliminary injunction under Section 5, to the extent set forth below.
The Secretary and all persons acting in concert with the Secretary, including county election officials, are hereby ENJOINED to undertake the following continuing actions that shall remain in effect as a temporary remedy for the lack of preclearance, unless and until preclearance is obtained under Section 5:
(1) Consistent with state and federal law, to reasonably ensure that persons who have been identified ("flagged") as potentially ineligible by the State's unprecleared automated voter verification procedures, and who remain in that status at the time of voting, shall have the opportunity to cast a ballot during early voting, absentee voting and election day voting for the
23

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P5aogfe2284Poafg2e7ID 330
November election by existing paper ballot procedures established under state law, namely the challenged ballot procedure (O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230). The Secretary has advised this court that these persons have been entered into the state's voter registration database, will be entered onto the state's electronic poll books and will have their flagged status noted, both in the voter registration database that is used during early and absentee voting, and in the electronic poll books used in polling place on election day. Timely notice shall be provided to persons who cast challenged ballots pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph of specifically what steps they must take to provide any needed proof of eligibility, and when these steps must be taken, in order to have their challenged ballots counted under state law. Consistent with state and federal law, these paper challenged ballots shall be set aside and considered under existing state law procedures for evaluating and counting challenged ballots. The Secretary hereby is required to issue before the 4 November 2008 election uniform guidance, in writing, to all county registrars explaining the operation of existing challenged balloting requirements of state law in this regard; and shall certify such notice to this court upon completion;
(2) Consistent with federal law, to reasonably ensure that no voter is permanently deleted from the voter registration list, and no voter registration
24

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P6aogfe2285Poafg2e7ID 331
application is permanently denied, based upon information flowing from the unprecleared automated voter verification process, unless the voter admits, in writing, to election officials his/her present ineligibility. This is designed and intended to reasonably ensure that voter information will remain on the voter registration list to be checked against challenged ballots cast by voters in the November election;
(3) Make diligent and immediate efforts to notify, in a uniform manner, every person whose voter registration presently remains flagged as potentially ineligible under the unprecleared automated verification procedures, that they can vote in the November election by challenged paper ballot and make diligent and immediate efforts to notify every such person that information contained in the person's registration or Department of Driver Services records, or both, has raised a question regarding the person's eligibility to vote, and that they will be given an opportunity by the local registrar to address their qualifications. The persons filing challenged ballots shall be notified promptly, in writing, of what is necessary to resolve the challenge (e.g., delivering a document demonstrating proof of citizenship to a county voter registration office in person or by later-verified facsimile, or bringing such document to those persons responsible for resolving challenged ballots within a certain specified number of days after election day); and,
25

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P7aogfe2286Poafg2e7ID 332
(4) Consult with the Department of Justice to determine whether there are any additional actions that can be taken prior to the November election to reasonably ensure that persons who are actually eligible to vote, but whom the State's unprecleared voter verification procedures have flagged as potentially ineligible, are allowed to vote a ballot in the November election.
This temporary injunction addresses the Secretary's and the State of Georgia's compelling interest in complying with Section 5's mandate to ensure that no eligible voter is denied the right to vote for failure to comply with an unprecleared voting practice. It also preserves the integrity of the voting process by ascertaining the eligibility of the challenged voter to cast a vote, thereby preventing the dilution of the votes of eligible voters. Moreover, this temporary remedy addresses the Secretary's compelling interest in complying with HAVA so that no ineligible voter casts a ballot that cannot be later adjudged eligible, since there will be an opportunity for voters to provide additional information as to their eligibility before election day, on election day or after the election, as well as an opportunity for election officials to review this information and make a reasoned and informed determination on challenged ballots after the election. This remedy is designed and intended to reasonably ensure that no eligible voter is denied the right to cast a vote that can be counted later, and that no ineligible voter is allowed to cast a ballot
26

Case C8:a1s2e-c1v:-0081-2c9v4-0-J3D17W2-MJTACP-WDSoDc-uSmFeBnt D22o-c1u1menFtil3e6d 0F7/il2e7d/1120/2P7a/0g8e 2P8aogfe2287Poafg2e7ID 333

that cannot be discounted later. Such a remedy is intended to avoid

irreparable harm to the interests of both voter access and voter integrity, and

to voters and the State. In discharging their respective obligations under the

law and in complying with this order such intent should inform and guide the

actions of the Secretary and all those acting in concert with the Secretary,

particularly the local registrars and elections boards. This is ''a remedy that

in all the circumstances of the case implements the mandate of§ 5 in the

most equitable and practicable manner and with least offense to its

provisions" as well as with the least offense to the requirements of HAVA.

Clark v. Roemer, 500 U.S. 646, 660, 111 S. Ct. 2096, 2105 (1991).

c:!/ SO ORDERED, this

day ofOctober, 2008.

I

BIRCH, JR. UNITE STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE ELEVENTH CIRCU COURT OF APPEALS
JA T. CAMP, CHIEF UNITED STATES DIST ICT JUDGE FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
WILLIAMS. DUFFEY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
27

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-12 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID 334
Exhibit 6

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-12 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID 335 U.S. Department .,I' Justice Civil Rights Division

JDR:GS:AHN:par DJ 166-012-3
2001-1693

Voting Section~ GSt, 950 Penn.rylvania Avenue, N. W. Waahtngton, DC 20530
December 17, ·2001

The Honorable Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General State of Florida
The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

Dear Mr. Attorney General:
This letter regards your submission under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of the "Florida Election Reform Act of 2001." In our initial response to your submission, sent August 17, 2001, we requested additional information on, among other provisions, those addressing use of provisional ballots; posting of a voter's bill of rights; posting of voter responsibilities; and new voter purging procedures. We received additional information most recently on October 16, which by statute required our further response by the date of this letter.
As discussed below, the material the State has sent us in its initial submission and in response to our letter of August 17 has been extremely helpful in clarifying the provisions of the Act, and it has enabled us to now preclear the State's proposed procedures for provisional ballots (Sections 35, 36, 38, 41) and a Yoter bill of rights (Section 60). To round out our review, however, we renew our August 17 request for technical information regarding proposed voter purge procedures (Sections 70-72).

I. Provisional Ballots With respect to Sections 35, 36, 38, and 41 of the Reform Act,
which establish an entitlement to provisional ballots for voters whose eligibility cannot be readily determined and procedures for canvassing provisional b~llots, the Attorney General does. not interpose any objection to the specified changes.
This determination is expressly based on your representations on behalf of the State that, notwithstanding the availability of provisional ballots, poll workers will continue to first attempt to

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-12 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID 336
.~
i
'

-2-

verify a person's eligibility and correct precinct assignment, and

that if the poll worker can precinct, the poll worker precinct. See Letter, Oct.

determine that a will direct the 15, 2001 at p.7.

person is in the wrong person to the correct Modification of these

procedures (i.e., poll workers' failure to first try to verify

precinct eligibility, at precinct, provisional ballot) would constitute

prior to distribution of a an unprecleared voting change.

II. Voter Bill of Rights

With respect to the portion of Section 60 of the Reform Act

that Bill

amends Fla. of Rights,

Stat.§ 101.031 to require posting of a Voter's the Attorney General does not interpose any

objection.

III. Statewide Database and Purge Procedures

With respect to Sections 70-72 of the Reform Act, which

authorize the Department of State to contract with the Florida

Association of Court Clerks to design and maintain a statewide online voter registration database, and which create new voter purge

procedures, we still need additional the comparison required by Section

information in order to make 5 of the Voting Rights Act

between the purge procedures implemented pursuant to Section B of

the 1998 Sections

Anti-Voter Fraud Act and the purge procedures mandated 70-72 of the Election Reform Act. Set forth below

by is

additional information necessary for us to complete our review of Sections 70-72, identified by the number of the request in our

August 17, 2001 letter.

5 (a) Please identify whether the statewide voter registration

database/list created pursuant to § 98.0975 contained the names and

voter registration status of all registered voters in the State of

Florida, or only those Florida residents identified as having lost

their right questioned.

to vote or whose continuing eligibility to vote was In addition, please also provide the categories of

information provided in the database/list.

5 (b) Please identify with specificity the "other computer databases" that were utilized pursuant to § 98.0975, and the "other relevant sources" available to the State pursuant to § 98.0977. If the sources of information are not prescribed and/or limited by law, please indicate this for both sections. Please also provide information for both sections regarding the role of elections supervisors in identifying ineligible and potentially ineligible voters, specifically any mandatory procedures to be followed.

""' -- Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-12 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID 337

I

' \

5 (d) Please identify or describe for both sections the

standard of proof necessary, for sta to determine that

required, and the nature and degree of evidence te officials and county supervisors of elections a voter is potentially ineligible so that he or

she was or will be identified as such in the database for any of

ntp§hreeoc9ces8espd.s0eau9crry7eif7tif(oeo3d)re, rsietdaaaensbnodltinissfwhy. hitnehFgtehoerp"r§sout9oge8grn.et0si9nat7oilo7tlny, "tpihonleafeatlisinegleaicblnlilgageuriaibvgfioyeltietthrcysheadsneeegnvteoistdfeeodntrhcitnhee

in 98.075.

5 (e) Please identify or describe for both sections the standard of proof required, and the nature and degree of evidence necessary, to make a final determination that a voter is ineligible ptftahhonroeesrwdqaueenucrnyeauwnmtotiofietthreytahstreateedangbdsalcprtidhyesacphtlieolfteihone§fadgt9eersv8he..ie0ad9seoo7nrn7Icns,seh. etwahhdrIaiendctmihtaoaiatiovnhpnosep,treeealrwprislgowerioatdbousslle,edbpebaclegoeimanaricsepneoqlsemuttcieprlalaeneydrytioefotu.oyfr

5(£) Please provide the procedures that will be required of

supervisors of elections pertaining to to the required mailing pursuant to §

voters who fail to respond 98.0977, and specifically,

indicate whether supervisors must purge voters who fail to respond

to the mailing, or wait for more information. As the question

sought a comparison of those supervisors of elections prior 98.0975 and § 98.0977, please

practices required by county to purging voters pursuant to § address whether these practices

and/or the discretion afforded to elections supervisors under §

98.0977 have changed from prior practice.

5 (g) Please identify the procedures that could have been utilized by a voter who wished to contest his or her designation as a potentially ineligible voter with respect to § 98.0975, and please complete your answer with respect to § 98.0977.

5(j) Please complete your answer with respect to§ 9El.0977.

5 (kl For both § 98.0975 or § 98.0977, please provide the

criteria that were or will be used by state and county election

officials to initially identify and/or confirm the identity of a

potentially ineligible voter (e.g., ethnic background, Social Security

first and last name, sex, race, number, date of birth, etc.),

and whether the match for each criterion must be exact or may be

approximate.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-12 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID 338
-4-
The chart format in which you provided your initial responses to Request numbers S(a)-(k) was particularly clear and helpful. If possible, please continue to use this form by adding the remainder of the information identified above into one revised chart.
Finally, note that if the State plans to issue implementing regulations for Section 70, those regulations would be subject to Section 5 review. See 28 C.F.R. 51.15.
IE you have any questions concerning this letter, of if we can assist you in obtaining the requested information, please contact Amy Nemko (202-514-3232), an attorney on our staff. Refer to File No. 2001-1693 in any response to this letter so that your correspondence will be channeled properly.
sincerely,
~~1~
Chief, Voting Section

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID 339
Exhibit 7

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 10 PageID 340

ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH Attorney General State ofFlorida

TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-1050

Office of the Attorney Generi.I
State Programs (850)414-3300; SunCom 994-3300

January 29,2002

Mr. Joseph D. Rich Acting Chief, Voting Section
Civil Rights Division Department of Justice Post Office Box 66128 Washington D. C. 20035-1693

RE: Submission Under Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act

Florida Election Reform Act of 200I, Chapter 2001-40, Laws of Florida

File No. 2001-1693 Response to Letter of December 17, 2001

. i

Dear Mr. Rich:

This is in response to your letter of December 17, 2001 requesting additional information regarding Sections 70-72 ofFlorida's Election Reform Act of 2001 pertaining to the statewide voter database and purge procedures.

As in my previous correspondence, this response follows the numbering system set out in your December 17letter beginning with 5(a) and concluding with 5(k).

Before responding to the specific inquiries of your December 17, 2001, letter we believe it helpful to summarize the purpose and effect ofthe voting changes which remain under Section 5 review. These changes concern the marmer by which state and local election officials will identify persons who should be removed from the list of eligible voters because ofdeath, a
finding of mental incapacity with respect to voting, or conviction of a felony (without the restoration of civil rights). As you know, the statutory provisions which preclude voting by
persons who have been found to be mentally incompetent (and whose mental capacity with
respect to voting has not been restored), and by persons convicted of a felony (unless and until civil rights have been restored), as well by those who have died are long-stsnding provisions of Florida Jaw and such voting requirements are not themselves subject to Section 5 review.

The changes in law under review are designed to improve the process by which ineligible voters will be identified. The new procedures address deficiencies of the prior law which placed too
much weight on the accuracy ofstate records, required no notice to, or input from, voters whose rights were impacted, and placed a difficult stsndard on local election officials who might
question the accuracy of state records.· The new statute establishes that computer records might "suggest" ineligibility, but such suggestion only begins an investigative process to determine if the voter is, in fact, ineligible. Election officials now are required to notify voters of the suggestion of ineligibility and afford the voter an opportunity to correct mistakes. A voter is not

AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 10 PageID 341
Joseph D. Rich Page2 removed, under the new law, unless the election official determines thai the voter is, in fact, ineligible. If that decision is made, the voter will again be notified. The new law significantly enhances the rights of voters by promoting fair and accurate treatment. As you are aware, some voters seeking to participate in the 2000 national election in Florida alleged that when they appeared to vote they were told, for the first time, that they had been removed from the Jist of eligible voters because of one ofthe above-described factors; and they contended that such removal was an error. The new requirements of Florida law will minimize,· to a very significant degree, the chances that such erroneous removals will occur in future elections. The new law markedly enhances the legal protections of the right to vote. ·The voting changes under review are entitled to Section 5 preclearance since they do not have the purpose, and will not have the effect, ofdenying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color or membership in a language minority group. Clearly the new methods for identifYing ineligible voters will not lead to a retrogression in the position of racial minorities with respect to their effective exercise of the electoral franchise. Minority voting rights are advanced by the change in Florida law. We now tum to addressing the specific inquiries ofyou letter, which are answered in the order, and with the references, of your letter. 5(a) Section 98.0975 referenced the "central voter file" (CVC), and we assume that is what you are describing as the "statewide voter registration databases/list." The central voter file was defmed by section 98.097 as "a statewide, centrally maintained database containing the voter registration information ofall counties in this state." Thus, the central voter file was to include information regarding all registered voters. We have attached a document which describes database structure and its fields so that you can see the fields of information included. Exhibit A. There are three main categories ofinformation in the CVF:
Biographical and identification data- name, address, date ofbirth, race, gender, social security number (an optional field), voter registration number (as provided by the supervisor ofelections), precinct codes, single member district codes, and other identifYing data as available from the county voter registration system, which is maintained by the county supervisor of elections . ._ Voter history data- data, as available from the counties, reflecting voter history for state election cycles. As previously noted, the voter history only reflects whether a voter cast a ballot, not how a voter voted. _ A record of those active voters contained within the biographical and identification data that had been identified by Database Technologies, ·Inc. (contractor) as possible ineligible voters. The contractoridentifies these possible ineligible voters as outlined in the Requirements Document. (Exhibit B).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 10 PageID 342
Joseph D. Rich Page3
5(b)
In responding to this question and the ones that follow we want to emphasize that a major purpose of the change in law is to enhance the protection to citizens in evaluating whether they have lost their eligibility to vote in a particular county. Both the old law and the new law used the term "other computer databases" in describing the sources of relevant information. (Compare 98.0975(3)(a)(Florida Statutes 2000) with 98.0977(4)(Florida Statutes 2001.) The new law also says that election officials may use "other relevant sources" in evaluating voter eligibility. • (98.0977(3)(Florida Statutes 2001.) Neither the old law nor the new law limited the sources of information. Sources that have been used include the following:
Criminal history data from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Records of voting rights restoration from the Florida Office of Executive Clemency. Records of deceased persons from the Florida Bureau of Vital Statistics. Data Base Teclmology's Proprietary Data from:
Florida's Department of Motor Vehicles. United States Social Security Administration Death File. Department of Corrections in Florida and other states.
Again, however, these sources are not exhaustive. If an election official learns that a voter has died, for example, the voter's name should be removed from the list of eligible voters.
You also seek information regarding the role of elections supervisors in identifying ineligible or potentially ineligible voters. Under both the old and new laws elections supervisors are required to implement list maintenance procedures and those procedures are described by statute. Compare 98.065 • 9S.0975 (Florida Statutes 2000) with 98.065 • 98.0977 (Florida Statutes 2001). The major change is that the new law prov:ides more protection to voters to ensure that any removal is proper.
Under the old law sent forth in 98.0975, state officials sent to county election officials a listing of voters determined to be ineligible. County election supervisors were required to "attempt to verify the information" but also were required to remove the names if "the supervisor does not determine that the information provided by the division is incorrect." The double-negative of this statutory language required an affirmative finding that a mistake had been made by state officials. The presumption was that the list was correct. Virtually no procedural or substantive protection was afforded to the affected voter.
Protection of the right to vote is enhanced significantly by the new law. Under 98.0977 the information from databases listing deaths, criminal felony convictions, or incompetency are merely the starting point for evaluating whether a particular voter should be removed :from the voter list. That is why the statutes now say the data "suggests" that a particular voter should be removed from the list. Under the new law, each potentially ineligible voter must be notified ofthe possible removal and the voter is thereby given an opportunity to provide information indicating that removal would be improper. There is no .longer a presumption favoring the accuracy of any computer database. Actually, the presumption now favors the voter, since a voter is not removed unless "the supervisor ofelections determines that the voter is not eligible to vote under the laws ofthis state." TI1ese voter protections are described in 98.0977(3).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 10 PageID 343
Joseph D. Rich Page4 5(d) The preceding paragraphs describe the difference in the standards ofthe old and new laws. The old Jaw placed greater reliance on the accuracy ofcomputer databases. The old law described no specific steps that an election supervisor must take to verify information provided by the state officials; thus "verification" might be satisfied merely by confirming that names provided by state officials match names on the list ofeligible voters. The new law describes specific procedures requiring notice to voters and an opportunity to correct mistakes. In fact, the new law requires notice to voters before any decision on removal, and a subsequent notice after any decision to remove the voter from the list ofeligible voters. Also, it is worth repeating that the old law required removal if "the supervisor does not determine that the information provided by the division is incorrect" whereas the new law precludes removal unless the elections supervisor "determines that the voter is not eligible to vote under the laws of this state." Your letter indicates aneed for further explanation ofthe use ofthe word "suggests" in the new law. That word does not change the procedures from the old law for identifying potentially ineligible voters, but the word clarifies that the appearance ofa name on the list does not, by itself, confirm ineligibility. In other words, the presumption ofineligibility contained in the old law is removed by use ofthe word "suggests." The new safeguards ofnotice and inquiry form the basis for the decision as to whether a particular voter should be removed from the list of eligible voters. The final determination is made by the elections supervisor based on the totality offactual information that is available including information from the voter. The supervisors must also conduct generallistmalntenance once every two years pursuant to Section 98:065, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of protecting "the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance ofaccurate and currentvoter registrationrecords". Section 98.075, Florida Statutes, provides for further list maintenance activities including address confirmations To determine that a voter is potentially ineligible to vote, a supervisor ofelections must attempt to verify the information provided on the CVF pertaining to deaths, felonies and mental incapacitation. Ifthe supervi~or detenuines this information is correct the name of that voter must be removed from the registration rolls, subject ofcourse to the due process entitlements discussed below. At this time, the Division of Elections recognizes no "other relevant sources" sufficiently reliable for use in the Statewide Voter Registration Database pursuant to Section 98.0977, Florida Statutes. In the past, Database Technologies used other sources that the Division of Elections did not deem sufficiently reliable and are not permitted for use pursuant to the current Section 98.0977, Florida Statutes.
Accordingly, the initial design of the database will .only compare Voter Biographical and Identification Data to the following three databases, although additional sources are permitted should the supervisors of elections deem them sufficiently reliable, as specifically prescribed in Section 98.0977(3), Florida Statutes:
Criminal history data from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 10 PageID 344

Joseph D. Rich . Page 5
Records of voting rights restoration from the Florida Board of Executive Clemency. Records ofdeceased persons from the Florida Office of Vital Statistics.

There is no reliable single source ofdata for those adjudicated mentally incompetent in Florida at this time. To the extent that county supervisors ofelections receive and are able to verify information on such adjudication, the system will allow that data to be entered into the database.

The clerk of the court is required to provide a list to the supervisor of elections of each person adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting during the preceding calendar month, which ·person was a resident ofthat supervisor's county pursuant to Section 98.093(2), Florida Statutes. In addition, the clerk ofcourt is required to provide the supervisor ofelections with a list ofeach person whose mental capacity has been restored with respect to voting.

Each supervisor compares voter registration information with information provided by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the Board of Executive Clemency, Office of Vital Statistics and other relevant sources as noted above. At that point, if the supervisor finds information suggesting ineligibility to vote, the person shall be notified by certified United States mail. Subsection (6) provides that the supervisors' duties are mandatory, violation of which shall result in a misdemeanor for the supervisor ofelections. Section 98.0977, Florida Statutes, mandates all other list maintenance activities as outlined above.

It should be noted that through the implementation of Section 98.0977, Florida Statutes, the burden of proof is shifted from the voter to the supervisor of elections. The recent pre-clearance of provisional ballots also allows a voter to cast a provisional ballot ifthere is any doubt as to eligibility at the polls.

After comparing the data, if the supervisor ofelections finds information that suggests that a voter

is ineligible to vote, the voter must be notified. The supervisor bears the burden to demonstrate

ineligibility by the highest degree of proof consistent with the fact that the fundamental right to

vote is at stake.

·

5(e)

The old law did not require any notice to impacted voters. Thus, a voter may not have known that he or she had been removed from the list of eligible voters until appearing at the poll to vote. The new law corrects that deficiency by requiring notice and an opportunity for the voter to submit information. Notice is again required if a decision is made to remove a voter. The type of information to be submitted by the voter under the new law will depend on the allegation suggesting ineligibility. For example, a voter might respond that "I am not dead." Or a voter might deny that he or she was ever convicted ofa felony; or the voter might show that rights have been restored after conviction. Legislation cannot anticipate every issue that may arise, and here the legislature required fact-finding be the local election officials. There can be no contention that it will be difficult for election officials to determine, with input from impacted voters, whether a particular voter is dead, has been declared mentally incompetent or has been convicted ofa felony and has not had civil rights restored. Again, an affirmative finding of ineligibility must be made before any removal occurs. Election supervisors who fail to perform these duties properly face sanctions. Section 98.0977(6).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 10 PageID 345

Joseph D. Rich Page6

While there is no guidance in this statute as to the course ofaction a voter must follow to contest an bwaedheeincteherrmwrooinnuealotdiuoisnnlvyoofrlievnmeelovivgireitbdui,allitlthyye,aSsnueypccetiorovnnics9eoi8rv.a0sbh8la1el(l3dr)ee,msFtoolornersitdtrhaaatSitotpanetuorstfeodsn,o'ssctuanmtaemesnettheuadpt oeifnliagsivabotiiltsieftayr'c.stonraymperohaosf

tAtdriteshhnheelefeeimeettstceleoaivotfrrgiudimvooniftdbentidineiadnisitlbrdnieio'fotmissgrynnvotgtuaeemhaolsl,neiittingtdthnhvhfniefbeoomeooivtntblrreuioinmfourtsYtyaltreialtd.ssrritt.eoeihAveonqneliTnfiaugot,hseveciuftirsboehspgtltrergreestieione,ersfv,cfsouitiehottepfaiidernwionemsgUrndvivnoaorinitsgnnetsiiteqoteoaetrtlunhrthdiesigeoirfhsSiertfsbaohtsuealaimellldpttiehertderceysatreihtm,ttvmiaieottoisahhsnaonvioeiisnnaslor.lsftoioTeifunnoinrfphnfdroeeieftsnholrrinenvmetrohcomiesratretlidioeitaocgivgertoneiiroiobonssmttntifeotbrl,oiuraeetmltsyiieiesgtfo.acssaintkttnAthtaiaehoeebbttenleolairistsgostehufhihkdmiabpnestliebau.enrrlpees,Ievftfoadtloi,hsiissergnoaeoeteitefnnrb,tsrrdeifmueotlrohimpaftrireyenenepor.avlvoovvetiotiatiecoiseltwcto.ennieorrtiAnionooaignssslff

The following is the completed answer found in the response "This is basically a reasonableness standard using supervisor

dated October 15, 2001, on of elections experience and

page

23:

expertise, infused with the recognition that at issue is the right to vote.

S(f) TtmfoIaoafvnhcaaameidailvleianpatokaebrotteweelneesrtuthplifhamnearweofiplnovbseteriaimntscosoievnioassicntsscoioiaoroonrefnyntfaoesitrtdsneehttedflheeottaehrvbrtremayamevnsaalatiuetniritgcloaeoatgtcnibioteoo.hlsnern(etdSi.sio-vneuknAoefpeotoeel9erlrpmf8rvsi'r.sntia0easgtmc9otieoo7rsosnn7yavt.(snwia4tndeliA)ulm)illennoNh,dydcaboiaefcvultilaineitcgtgaeerotilhadbvttedoiheblermieyvntcryoimoss.ittssieaeotrtnbInaestfa,cistrechsheenuoecdptrwoiradtoortiedeneevvcssiaieidnstarhefi,froadoeeiinsrrrdbmenieeysqoavcucttiaoisleilooriuroernntaeidngftamiietvmoeoroadnuvbilmoseaatsbftaebhlaideeelll voter, the voter again receives notice by certified mail. This new law significantly enhances the protection afforded to voters as compared to prior Florida law.

S(g)

The old law did not limit the steps that a voter could take to contest the designation as a

"potentially ineligible voter." The voter had the option of proving to the elections supervisor that

the designation was wrong. The deficiency of the old law was that there was no requirement that

the voter even be notified that she learn of the action until appearing

was a "potentially ineligible to vote and learning that her

voter." Thus, a voter may not name had been removed from

the

hlTsrieeeshmetaekroodntfvoeteaowllrieegpJsaiuatbcowrlhsreuea"avdptnhodotetrteeteornsnsas.ttemihOaseeldlfFytecolfoiointucrheiirdeelsinaegl,ciiAsbietelvdseoemfnovieofnulttiinhegsdreti"rbeaorlptelitdrvhvieeoloarPtowertlroodsbcylapeadurwdeure,qsrcueutihasiAreniiotncvnttgo,ottonaeSnorredtecic,mcotieioufoanvnlndee9dc-t8ehea.s0evns8eavon1ropy(ta3,pef)otrtoeroftrrrcuorincmreihcmtuaytliholtteeovcnolabgiulese-rttto.hfe

eligible voters.

Under the former statute, a voter who wished to contest his or her designation as a potentially ineligible voter under Section 98.0975,Florida Statutes, would have had to refer to Section

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 10 PageID 346
Joseph D. Rich Page7
98.081(3), Florida Statutes. This subsection states that if a voter's name has been erroneously removed, the supervisor of elections shall restore that person's name upon satisfactory proof. In addition, under existing Section 98.075, Florida Statues, if the supervisor ofelections believes a voter is not 18, not a United States citizen, is a fictitious person or has listed an address that is not that voter's legal residence, the voter is entitled to an administrative hearing through the process. provided by Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, Florida's Administrative Procedure Act. At this hearing, the supervisor would have to show the required basis for removal and, if the supervisor made out a prima facie case, the voter would then be permitted to show why his or her name should remain on the registration books. Finally, the voter may appeal this decision in a circuit court.
The following is the completed answer found in the response dated October 15, 2001, on page 23: "There are basically tWo notifications. First, the owortunity to respond and show they are not the same person. Second, if a voter provides satisfactory proof that his or her name has been erroneously removed, the supervisor must restore that person's registration pursuant to Section 98.081(3), Florida Statutes."
5(j)
The following is the completed answer found in the response dated October 15, 2001, on page 24: "Access is intended to be restricted to the supervisors of elections and certain Department of State employees. This will be determined during the creation ofthe database."
S(k)
98.0975
For the CVF, pursuant to former Section 98.0975, Florida Statutes, the initial identification of potentially ineligible voters was deflned in the Requirements Document. (Exhibit B). Processing the files was very involved. The first step was to standardize the way the name in each file was parsed. This step was essential due to the wide variety of files and the lack of a consistent method of data entry. All name suffixes were stripped from the last name field and placed in a separate sufflx.field. The first name field was deflned to contain any character appearing before the first space. The remaining data was assigned to the middle name field.
The second step was to look for matches in the files. The records were compared based on the last name, first name the least common denominator of the middle name and the date of birth. In using the least common denominator while matching the middle name, a blank field or a matching middle initial was considered to be a match. In other words, John Doe and John R. Doe were considered to be matches for John Robert Doe, while John Michael Doe was not.
The third step was to run matches against social security numbers, where available. If a match was found, then those records were compared again by last name, first name and date ofbirth. At least one ofthose fields had to match before the record was considered a hit. Ifthe social security number was the only field that matched, that hit was discarded. The Division has found that social security numbers are an excellent source for confirming identity after other factors have been researched. However, social security numbers, as a source for establishing identity, are not as reliable because

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 10 PageID 347 •
Joseph D. Rich Page 8 social security numbers are frequently made up or the numbers are commonly interchanged. The fmal step taken to establish felon matches was to compare the hits found against the clemency data in the same marmer as stated above. If a record of clemency was found, the match was not reported to the supervisors of elections. 98.0977 Pursuant to Section 98.0977, Florida Statutes, for the Statewide Voter'RegistrationDatabase matches will be run in much the same marmer. However, a ranking procedure will be implemented. This procedure involves a mathematical algorithm as described in Exhibit C. Each match on a set of predefined criteria that can be adjusted over time to provide for greater accuracy is also being implemented. Under this approach, quality points are assigned to elements of matches based on additional fields available in the data. A quality point level is selected, above which matches will be worked and below which they will be discarded. Initially, the system will use a very high quality point level. Over time, however, a lower quality point level may prove accurate and, ifso, may be adopted. The current draft of the proposed ranking algorithms is attached as Exhibit C. Please note that it provides differing quality point levels for exact, as opposed to varying, levels of approximate matches. Under both systems, once a voter is identified as a potential ineligible, the supervisor ofelections in each county must make the final administrative determination. The Division will provide the supervisors ofelections with a standardized letter for voter contact requesting additional information to aid in this determination. Evidence ofmissing or erroneous data would be the most common item indicating that a voter was identified as potentially ineligible in error. The statewide voter registration database is of a highly technical nature. As we learn more, the database will be subject to modifications. This is a growing and technologically innovative process that will be adjusted as experience and expertise dictates. The overriding purpose ofthis endeavor is to develop and maintain the best and most reliable voter database. The Division of Elections has approached the design and development of the Central Voter Registration Database as a joint project in cooperation with the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections (FSASE) and a great deal of input from the data source agencies and the public. The FSASE seated two advisory boards, the Voter Registration Advisory Board composed of Supervisors ofElections and the VR Technical Advisory Group composed oftechnical computer experts from the county election offices. Monthly public meetings ofthese participants' representatives ofthe data source agencies, and other interested individuals began on September 5, 2001. They were tasked with both design and implementation of the new system. These meetings are slated to. continue through the final development and the operational, life ofthe system. Once the system is completed and operational the Division ofElections will implement an ongoing performance review ofthe system. A key part ofthe system design is the ability to monitor the frequency ofincorrect matches, thereby allowing for the detection and correction of incorrect data; This process will result in an increase in accuracy as experience warrants. The VRAdvisory Board and the Department's Project Management, Oversight and Budget groups will be responsible for monitoring the performance of the system throughout the

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-13 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 10 PageID 348
Joseph D. Rich Page 9 system's life. Design documents and summaries of meetings are available on the Department's website at http :1/election.dos.state.fl. us/cvdb
We have attempted to respond to all of your questions fully and accurately, and we submit this letter as our complete and final response to the remaining inquiries of your written request for additional information. In conclusion, we submit that it cannot be disputed that the new law is an improvement over the prior law in advancing fairness to voters and better assuring that only persons who are in fact ineligible will be removed from the list of eligible voters. The standard for Section 5 preclearance is satisfied. Although the statutory time period for preclearance cannot be tolled further, we remain willing to discuss factual issues with you Ifyou require further information, please do not hesitate to contact George Waas of my office at (850) 414-3662 or Amy K. Tuck with the Department of State, Division of Elections at (850) 2456208.
ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-14 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID 349
Exhibit 8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-14 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID 350 U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division

JDR : GS :AHN : j dh DJ 166-012-3 2001-1693

Voting Section- NWB. 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W Washington, DC 20530
March 28, 2002

The Honorable Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General State of Florida
The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

RAwovwdyaImnfooeeihtgtusotio2choeringrhe0rtugrnTseqn0repcgoh1uaAyuriia.tte"seenhrrcsgGadtetir,eeStitreeneIdintn4fapgpae2earaltrroroeoadSsUncurlvdeeever.iciwStspdsototpp.iriuitCoooeosrerye.tcnnnenravolssasste1ui,er.leoa9er7wur7atgi0esnos3iuW,idud,fsteoberhyt7eomraroor1msaveflu,ripltcoisraoiztesattohbneiesinioevnouusrdneenSbt srd"im7tuneSFao2intfgnatelsooedoodcisrestritfdmhyoiirftoiduroenttaanSanhus,itotsedeeriioEnsscosn7eAttalnuihe0tnlcoob,acrttnedmstiineA7damoi5o1pftsuonao,susgsborsiebtuomRaoafcslnns,erittaetd,cifethooa1cireontan7r7emhen2dns,neVcd,,tAo2floryr0ctodi0tmn.1og,n January 30, 2002.

SbnchoaeartcentisgoTutehnhbssea.setA7q0tSuth,teeoeenr7tn1fteha,lyieitlaiuGnPgrdreaeont7cei2oerofdanolutfrhdteoeotsheeAsefontnErtjooolrtetihnnceeitnyitohtAeneGdrpemRenoneiesffnreooairrslmctarentamoyAtiecooontn.bbt jjeooeHccff ttoitSwohdeeneocveettsiroo, nnwoe5t (28 C.F.R. 51.14).

Sc2a9fleoacrlrteeiiomfTtitnheceinars5t"tii]odsounenberteesdmrgmiaissnresidnicoyiatnniotogi,uonrnitsnhJ. aceisnluuTSdeahtixreanyptg,Sere'tts2ash9stee,liymr2rpebe0lpap0es2rrmeee, dessneeloetnnantttteatieodtthin,roenof[sSofhrteataahnetrdexeaa'fsmteperlne":tiJraen.

an- ocwtchuarfaatcvytohreos rfethaneisyvncoootmelrpo;untgJeaernr d. aa2tpa9brealsesuetmteapnrtdioantthaf3a;tvothr

ing e p

the resump

tion

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-14 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID 351

-2-

- that the appearance of a voter's name on the State's list

of potential confirm that

ly v

inelig oter's

ible voters ineligibilit

does not, y; Jan. 29

b

y itse letter

lf, at

4;

sc-inaotetuhilnsaitgftiiieebvsdle' ermlivfiesiorctteaseltyrisoobfnpy rrobecyvogniidcsfeoitredumrnebitndyygevstltoheatctaeettrisono;nafmJfoaiencsf.ifaoicf2ls9iapmllosetatetmtcnehatyrinanaalmlotyte4sb; eon

-that through burden of proof of elections to

i

mplementation of Fla. Stat. is shifted from the voter t establish ineligibility by

§ 98.0977, o the super the highest

the viso

r

degree of proof consistent with fundamental right to vote is at

the fact that the stake; Jan. 29 letter at

5;

and

k-iaisnevteeahnpliaoliinagt gblioiblnfesiyglasiienttreyvfmoboriatmnbesedruadittcfiooaainsntielsdbareapbltseoeyrvedscasuonotmantntptetaetoisorftenathctiheocrerrdeveassvou,tategeldutgrha'eesbtsiytocfioniotnhnneaotoilfnrfuedaceelodlcridsi-on eligibility; Jan 29 letter at 6.

yrtipjihentuorsqfoausoeucrttrleimM fJrttdhhia,unoneecrgdw.oeiiSusimfp2neli9rdlcptceyailtcsleaitoecmlipsoeunutpeantsplnerys5eatoerirnndtfcvocwgoietsviohpntoeuheurrrloednesthcdidmelSeoeidcrfptkaouJleeSaetrumelnelenyesuceto,catincieftrtoiylosioinnF,nkng2lsesao59tpn.rirdttiolhduoefecaFtttehettuhedEaarvesurttlhoereateiactmhisrstnei,wpogsshlnwueeSocmmetlthReameauftenoneaanftongrrdiirntdwezemhgserindslAitolanitcnntd this letter.

Finally, as we no Section 5 preclearance issue implementing reg

ted in our December 17, 2001, letter, should be sought if the State plans
ulations or administrative procedures

to for

Section 70. See 28 C.F.R. 51.15.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-14 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 4 PageID 352
-3-
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact Amy Nemko (202-514-3232), an attorney on our staff. Refer to File No. 2001-1693 in any response to this letter so that your correspondence will be channeled properly.
Sincerely,
~-Jl tJ' -p~~l
Jl/seph D. Rich Chief, Voting Section

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 22 PageID 353
Exhibit 9

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 22 PageID 354
•

TERRY GODDARD ATTORNEY GENERAL

Office of the Attorney General State of Arizona

CI\'P.. ···.~.,.,... '1''''('' ,\·. . . .·'.·,A·.:.. ON
I"" "-. Zm'"l ._.,··,·,• ·-' 1 i"·.:"I II·, 56
Direct Line (602) 542-7993

June 26, 2006

VIA OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Mr. John Tanner Chief, Voting Section Civil Rights Division Room 7254, NWB U.S. Department of Justice 1800 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006

SECTION 5 SUBMISSION
NO.c tJm/c-y(/1/(

Re: Submission under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act Arizona Secretary of State Elections Instructions and Procedures Manual ("Procedures Manual"), June 2006 Updates · EXPEDITED PRECLEARANCE REQUESTED

Dear Mr. Tanner:

We make the following submission pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended. To have the updated Procedures Manual in effect in time for the primary election on September 12, 2006, we request expedited review pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 51.34. For your convenience, the information is set forth below as prescribed by 28 C.F.R. 51.27.

A. COPY OF ENACTMENT.

A copy of the Arizona Secretary of State's June 2006 Procedures Manual is attached as

Exhibit A.

.

B. COPY OF EXISTING PROCEDURES.

A copy of the current Procedures Manual is attached as Exhibit B.

C. EXPLANATION OF CHANGES.

A "red-lined" version of the 2006 Procedures Manual is attached as Exhibit C. The "red-lined" version indicates the changes between the current Procedures Manual and the Manual that is the subject of this submission. The substantive changes, with reference to the page numbers as found in Exhibit C, are as follows:

1275 West Washington, Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2926 • Phone 602.542.3333 • Fax 602.542.8308

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 22 PageID 355

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 2 of21

Pg.29 Pg.31 Pg. 35 Pg. 44 Pg. 45 Pg. 46 Pg.47 Pg.48
Pg. 49-53
Pg. 53

Adds the TDD line.
Adds reference to "Sample Forms: HAVA Administrative Complaint Form."
Changes years and dates to reflect relevant dates for 2006 and 2007.
Deletes the reference to A.R.S. § 16-901(23) because it does not apply in this area.
Adds a reference to A.R.S. § 16-901(23); changes the "10" to "9" because only 9 reports are now required; adds a reference to A.R.S. § 16-913(K).
Adds the citation to and language of A.R.S. § 16-921, which was amended to permit an insurer licensed in Arizona to make up to two written solicitations for political contributions from a licensed insurance producer with whom the insurer has an exclusive contract.
Allows a political action committee to file a statement of organization prior to filing an application for an official serial number for a petition. If a request for a serial number is later filed, the committee is required to file an amended statement of organization within five days.
Adds a reference to A.R.S. § 16-917(A), which was amended to require political committees making independent expenditures within ten days before the day of any election to send by certified mail a copy of the literature and/or advertisement to each candidate named, or referred to, in the literature and/or advertisement within 24 hours after submitting or mailing it.
Updates the filing schedule for campaign finance reports ("CFRs") for political committees, except standing political committees, by removing the 2005 dates arid adding the relevant dates for the 2006 election cycle. Updates the filing schedule for CFRs for standing political committees. Also updates the filing schedule by reflecting the fact that standing political committees are no longer required to file a report covering the period beginning January 1 through May 31 (A.R.S. § 16-913(K)).
Adds language that statewide candidates must file their CFRs with the Secretary of State ("SOS''). Also adds language that the provision requiring statewide and legislative candidates to file their CFRs with the SOS does not apply to candidates for federal office and that those reports are filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 22 PageID 356

Mr. John Tanner June 26,2006 Page3 of21

Pg.54
Pg. 57-58 Pg.59
Pg.60 Pg. 61-62 Pg. 63-64 Pg.64 Pg. 65

Adds language that the SOS shall make available for public access copies of all reports filed with the SOS's office through the office website.
Adds a reference to A.R.S. § 16-916.01, which permits county officers in charge of elections to implement an electronic filing system for relevant documents under the campaign finance laws. It also permits the county officer to require written or printed copies of filings during the implementation of the electronic filing systems.
Adds a new paragraph on "Additional Filing Methods." This paragraph reflects A.R.S. § 16-916(C), which expands the methods for the delivery ofCFRs.
Adds a new paragraph on "Political Party Candidates Filing of Nomination Papers." The new paragraph sets forth the requirements of A.R.S. § 16-311(A).
Adds to the list of circumstances under which a candidate may not run as a write-in candidate. Specifically, it provides that a candidate may not file for the general election if the candidate filed a nomination petition for nomination other than by primary for the office sought and failed to
provide a sufficient number of valid petition signatures as prescribed in
A.R.S. § 16-341.
Adds a new paragraph on "Continued Representation" of political organizations on the official ballot, pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-804.
Adds new section on Arizona's "Proofof Citizenship Requirement." The Department of Justice precleared this requirement as part of Proposition 200, approved by Arizona's voters in the general election of2004. This section describes what constitutes "satisfactory evidence of United States citizenship" when registering to vote.
Moves the section on "Statewide Voter Registration System" to pages 70 and 71.
Adds to the section on "Voter Registration Processing" the requirement that the voter registration form be accompanied by evidence of U.S. citizenship pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-166(F).
Adds language pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-166(0) that registrants modifying their registration record in the county in which they are currently registered need not provide proof of citizenship. Explains that voters registering in new counties do need to provide proof of citizenship.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 22 PageID 357

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 4 of21

Pg.66. Pg. 67-69
Pg. 70 Pg. 71-73

Removes language regarding applicants who already have a unique identifying number assigned by the SOS.
Adds language that the counties will determine what number to lise as the voter registration identification number printed on a citizen's voter registration card. Also provides procedures for when a driver's license or social security number provided by the applicant to establish U.S. citizenship does not match state motor vehicle records or records of the social security administration.
Adds language to clarify that the voter registration form, when accompanied by proof of citizenship, must be accepted if the citizenship question is not answered. Changes the phrase "can not" to "shall not" in explaining that the registration shall not be completed until the citizenship question is answered yes as required by A.R.S. § 16-121.01 and42 U.S.C. § 15483(b)(4)(B). Adds language that if the citizenship box is marked "no," the recorder shall send a copy ofthe form to the registrant with a letter explaining that the registrant must be a U.S. citizen.
Removes language indicating that the registrant establishes U.S. citizenship by answering "yes" to the citizenship question. Outlines procedures for collecting and maintaining information provided by registrants to establish citizenship. Also adds procedures for processing and verifying proof of U.S. citizenship.
Removes language from the section on "Statewide Voter Registration System" (moved from page 63) that the SOS "shall develop" a statewide database, and that the database "shall" include a unique voter identifying number. Identifies by number the four major areas for comparison under the statewide voter registration system. Under a subsection on motor vehicle records, adds language that the voter registration form requires either a driver's license number of the last four digits of the social security number. Adds that the counties "shall" process any discrepancies or updates obtained from the MVD.
Identifies information for determining if duplicate records exist among counties, and adds procedures for processing information regarding felonies obtained from juror questionnaires. Adds new information regarding the restoration of rights for convicted felons, and language that the SOS' s office "shall" compare all death notification records received fromDHS.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 22 PageID 358

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 5 of21

Pg. 73-74 Pg.75 Pg. 76
Pg. 77 Pg. 78
Pg. 79
Pg.80 Pg. 80-82
Pg.82

Adds section on "Voter Registration Record Status List." The section explains the circumstances under which voter registration records are considered "active," "inactive," "canceled," "pending," or "rejected."
Changes "applicant" to "registrant." Clarifies that registrations generated through Arizona State EZ Voter System include registrations done through the EZ Voter Internet Service or voter registrations processed in a Motor Vehicle Division office and electronically transmitted to the SOS.
Adds cite to A.R.S. § 16-152(B).
Under section entitled "Incomplete or Illegible Registration," provides that a new voter registration must also include proof ofU.S. citizenship, pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-166(F), and gives cite to that statute.
Updates the relevant dates for 2006 and 2007. Adds cite to A.R.S. § 16135(B).
Removes footnote 2.
Adds a paragraph that explains that once a county cancels a voter registration, the record of the voter shall be retained for five years on the voter registration database before it is moved to alternative storage.
Removes reference to footnote 2.
Adds provision tmder "Mailing Requirements" that only official election mailings shall count toward the first attempt under the NVRA in accordance with law.
Moves section on "Voter Registration Data Processing" to this part of Procedures Manual.
Moves section on "Auditable Formats Internet Transmission" to this part of Procedures Manual. Removes the paragraph on "Identification," and rewords the paragraphs on "Encryption" and "Auditability." Changes language to state that when encrypting information for transmission, the county "shall" choose no less than 128-bit strength.
Under section on "Voter Registration/Duplicate Match File Requirements," removes the requirement that the counties electronically transmit a voter registration file to the SOS on a daily basis. Instead, the counties are required to transmit such files that contain records that are new, changed or deleted since the last submission.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 22 PageID 359

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 6 of21

Pg. 83-84 Pg.84
Pg. 86 Pg. 87 Pg. 90 Pg.91 Pg.93

Removes "phone number" from the list of fields that are included in the voter registration file transmitted to the SOS.

Under section on "Precinct Registers," adds: a requirement that counties run a full file right before printing off signature rosters and precinct registers to ensure that the information at the statewide level and what is printed on the signature rosters is synchronized; a requirement that county recorders check the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program database at least 2 weeks before the election for any registrant who submitted a certificate of naturalization and input the verified registrants prior to printing the rosters; and, a requirement that if time does not permit, the county recorders print these in a supplement to the roster to be distributed to each precinct immediately preceding the election or give the newly registered voter a recorder's certificate.

Under section on "Voter Requests for Early Ballots," provides that elector, to make a complete and correct request for an early ballot, can provide information other than date of birth and state or county of birth "that if compared to the voter registration information on file would confirm the identify of the elector."

Adds paragraphs on how to obtain information from protected voters on their participation in an election year. Moves paragraphs pertaining to absent uniformed or overseas voters to section starting on page 95.

Adds paragraph on "Use of Accessible Voting Device at On-Site Early Voting" to provide more specific instructions.

Moves section on "Early Voting Sites" to this part of Procedures Manual.

Also provides that recorder may mark or post the 75-foot limit from the

outside doorway.

·

The paragraph on "Voter Assistance" is moved to the section on "Special Election Boards for Ill or Disabled Voters," starting on page 93.

Adds requirement that county recorders provide clear instructions to early voters regarding the appropriate marking device to be used to mark the ballot.

Adds a paragraph on how to deal with persons who wish to vote for presidential electors but who have begun residence in another state after the 30th day immediately before an election in which presidential electors are chosen. Adds section on "Special Election Boards for Ill or Disabled Voters."

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 22 PageID 360

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 7 of21

Pg. 94-95

Moves section entitled "Challenges to Early Voting Ballots" to this part of Procedures Manual.

Pg. 95-105

Reorganizes section and changes name to "Military and Overseas Voters." Adds definitions of "absent uniformed services voter" and "overseas voter." Adds sections on "Qualifications for Voter Registration" and "Fax and Electronic Transmission." Rewrites section on "Special Write-In Early Ballots."

Under "Federal Write-In Early Ballots," provides that in circumstances set forth in the Manual, an overseas voter may use a federal write-in early ballot if the voter applies for an early ballot by 7:00p.m. on election day; this is changed from "30 days before the general election.'' Also provides for how to handle situations when a United States citizen who has never resided in the United States wants both to register to vote and to vote.

Provides that a federal write-in early ball of an overseas voter shall not be coimted if the application for an early ballot is received by the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections after 7:00p.m. on election
day, or an early ballot from the overseas voter is received by 7:00p.m. on
election day.

Adds sections on "Emergency Procedures- UOCAVA Early Ballot Processing," and "UOCAVA Reporting."

Pg. 106-107 Under section on "Required Number and Type of Voting Systems, Including Devices, for Primary and General Elections," removes references to 2004 elections.

Adds to list of requirements for voting systems used for elections with federal offices on the ballot; specifically, adds requirement that the ballot shall "provide a paper document or ballot that visually indicates the voter's selections."

Adds reference to A.R.S. § 16-446.

Pg. 108

Removes sentence "Cities and towns are exempt from A.R.S. § 16-447," and removes cite to A.R.S. § 16-442(B). · Adds paragraphs on the requirements of A.R.S. § 16-442.0l(A) and (B). Moves discussion of A.R.S. § 16-442.0l(C) to pg. 109.

Pg. 108-109 Under section on "Certification of Voting Machines," adds information regarding the equipment certification process and software security.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 22 PageID 361

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 8 of21

Adds paragraph on "Election and System Software Escrow Requirement" and on "Equipment Refresh Policy."

Pg. 109-110 Moves section on "Filing of Computer Election Programs with Secretary of State" to an earlier part of the Procedures Manual.

Pg. 111-112 Adds expanded section on "Election Management System Security."

Pg. 112-113 Adds section on "Voting Equipment Security."

Pg. 113-114 Adds section on "Election Media Security."

Pg. 114-119 MoVes section on "Logic and Accuracy Tests" to earlier in the Procedures Manual.

Pg. 114

Changes'language regarding logic and accuracy tests from "seven working days" to "ten business days."

Pg. 115

Expands on discussion of"Conduct of the Test."

Pg. 116

Provides that the results of each blank ballot test and a fully voted ballot test be preserved with the official results of the election.

Pg. 117

Changes language from "tabulating equipment" to "voting equipment."

Removes language that the logic and accuracy test ballots and database be sealed in a container.

Pg. 118

Removes the phrase "tabulation machines, computers" from section on "Logic and Accuracy Tests Performed by the Secretary of State."

Expands on explanation of"Scope of Test."

Under section on "Materials and Equipment Supplied by County," adds language that ballots or ballot layouts for accessible voting equipment will be delivered to the secretary of state no later than two weeks before early ·voting.

Pg. 119

Removes language "tabulation system" from section on "Materials and Equipment Supplied by County."

Provides that all tests performed by the secretary of state will be conducted while the voting equipment is in election mode. ·

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 22 PageID 362

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 9 of21

Pg. 120
Pg. 121 Pg. 122
Pg. 123 Pg. 125 Pg. 126
Pg. 129 Pg. 131

Moves section on "Tabulation Back-Up Plan" to earlier in Procedures Manual.
Substitutes language "as determined on the voter registration cut off 29 days before any election" with "after the registration cut-off date for the election."
Under section "Sample Ballots for Primary Elections," adds requirement that sample ballots "shall include the list of acceptable form of identification for voters."
Adds requirement that each sample ballot clearly indicate in a conspicuous location that it is not an official ballot.
Under section on "Sample Ballots for General Elections," adds requirement that sample ballots "shall include the list of acceptable forms of identification for voters."
Adds requirement that each sample ballot clearly indicate in a conspicuous location that it is not an official ballot.
Under section on "Sample Ballot" (for Presidential Preference Election), adds requirements that sample ballots "shall include the list of acceptable forms of identification for voters," and that each sample ballot clearly indicate in a conspicuous location that it is not an official ballot.
Under section on "Records Retention," adds statement that ballots and voting materials must be retained six months for all non-federal elections and adds cite to A.R.S. § 16-624(A).
Under primary election official ballot specifications, adds language that ballot specifications for accessible voting devices shall follow the same format and rotation as those of a printed ballot.
Under general election official ballot specifications, adds language that ballot specifications for accessible voting devices shall follow the same format and rotation as those of a printed ballot. .
Adds section on "Provisional Ballot Affidavit Specifications."
Clarifies that polling place changes are "precleared" by the Department of Justice.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 22 PageID 363

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 10 of21

Pg. 132-133

Under section "Instruction of Election Board Workers," adds the following to the list of topics that shall be covered in election board worker training:
Procedures for proof of identification. Accessible voting equipment.

Combines provisional ballot processing at the polls with procedures for proof of identification at the polls.

Pg. 134

Under section "Premium Board Worker Training," adds language that training sessions shall be taught by personnel under the supervision of an individual who holds an election officer's certificate issued by the SOS in accordance with A.R.S. § 16-407.

Pg. 136

Adds new duty for judges to examine the numbers on the seals on the voting machines to make sure they correspond to the numbers on the precinct election supplies inventory list.

Pg. 137

Adds new duty for marshals to preserve order at the polls and permit no violation of the election Jaws.

Moves "New Poll Worker Orientation" to here from page 138.

Changes section name from "Pre-Election Meeting" to "Pre-Election Responsibilities."

Pg. 138

Makes "Building Access" a separate section.

Adds language to "Equipment and Furniture Arrangement" and changes "DRE" to "Accessible Voting System."

Adds language to "Voting Device Check" to provide more specificity.

Pg. 139-140

Moves section on "Precinct Zero Repmt" to pg. 140. Adds languag·e to section on "Setting Up the Polling Place" to make directions more specific. Adds language regarding tamper-resistant or tamper evident seals.

Pg. 140-141 Adds language to section on "Precinct Zero Report."

Pg. 142

Under "Who May Vote," adds new first paragraph and removes rest of

section.

Pg. 143-144 Under "Early Ballot Drop Off," changes language of second paragraph.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 22 PageID 364

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 11 of21

Adds new section on "Ballot Box Overflow" to provide information to poll workers on how to resolve issues that arise at the polling place on election day.

Pg. 144

Adds new section on "Access to Auxiliary Bin" to provide information to poll workers on how to resolve issues that arise at the polling place on election day.

Pg. 145

Moves "Complete Power Failure or Unit Failure/Ballot Emergency Bin" to here from page 141.

Removes section entitled "When Names Do Not Appear on the Signature Roster."

Pg. 147

Removes "Voter Registration Data Processing" from here and moves it to page 80.

Pg. 148

Deletes "Filing of Computer Election Programs with Secretary of State."

Pg. 149

Removes "Equipment Diagnostic Testing" from here and moves it to page 111.

Pg. 149-153 Removes entire section on "Logic and Accuracy Tests" from here and moves it to pages 114-119.

Pg. 153

Removes "Tabulation Back-Up Plan" from here and moves it to page 119.

Pg. 154

Under section on "Spoiled Ballots," adds language that the inspector or judge shall mark the spoiled ballot in a manner to assure that it cannot be counted by any electronic voting system.

Pg. 154-162 Adds section on "Procedure for Proof of Identification and Provisional Ballot Processing at the Polls."1

Pg. 163

Adds two more reasons why a voter may vote a provisional ballot; specifically, when the voter has not provided sufficient identification at the polling location, and when the voter is challenged at the polling place.

Pg. 164-170

Deletes section on "Procedure for Provisional Ballots" because it has been incorporated with identification at the polls and is now in the section entitled "Procedure for Proof of Identification and Provisional Ballot Processing at the Polls" starting at page 154.

1 The Department ofJustice precleared the Secretary of State's "Procedure for Proof ofldentification at the Polls" on October 7, 2005 (DOJ File #2005-2943).

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 22 PageID 365

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 12 of21

Pg. 171

Removes reference to A.R.S. § 16-513(A)(4).

Adds Department of Justice Observers to list of persons who can remain inside the 75-foot limit while the polls are open.

Pg. 172

Adds new section on "Electioneering Outside the 75 Foot Limit."

Pg. 173

Removes "Early Voting Sites" from here and moves it to page 90.

Pg. 173-179 Removes entire section on "Early Ballot Processing" from here and moves it to pages 189-193.

Pg. 183

Adds to instructions for transporting the memory pack; specifically, adds that for accessible voting units with a paper receipt, the receipt will be placed in the container and that at least 2 designated election officials representing voters of different political parties shall deliver the container to the designated receiving site.

Under section "Certificate of Performance- Precinct Ballot Report," adds to the steps to be taken after all voters have left the polling place.

Pg. 184

Under section "Final Closing of the Polling Place, adds to the list of steps to be taken by the remaining election officials; specifically, they shall transport the voter verifiable paper audit trail printout or canister to the designated receiving site.

Pg. 185

Under "Election Security Requirements," adds "polling place ballot security" to list of basic security duties.

Pg. 185-186 Adds new section on "Polling Place Ballot Security."

Pg. 186

Provides that transportation of ballots may be monitored by political observers; removes mandatory language.

Pg. 187-193 Moves "Early Ballot Processing" to this part of Procedures Manual from pages 173-178.

Pg. 197

· Under "Provisional Ballots," adds paragraph that provisional ballot envelopes shall be visually distinguishable from other ballot envelopes and that the envelopes for provisional and conditional provisional ballots may be printed on color paper, may bear bar codes that do not identify the voter or may use other methods to visually distinguish those types of ballot envelopes.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 22 PageID 366

Mr. Jolm Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 13 of21

Pg. 199 . Pg. 203
Pg.206
Pg. 207 Pg.208
Pg.210 Pg. 211 Pg.212

Provides that provisional ballots be kept separate from conditional provisional ballots.

Removes language that "If a voter has marked his/her sample ballot/full

text of issues instead of the optical scan ballot, the sample ballot is sent to

the duplication board."

·

Under "Provisional Ballot Processing at Central Count," adds new paragraph that conditional provisional ballots shall be clearly distinguishable and kept separate from all other provisional ballots and that they shall not be processed until the voter has produced sufficient identification to the county recorder.

Moves "Verification of Provisional Ballots" to this part of Procedures Manual.

Adds to list of reasons why a ballot shall remain unopened and shall not be counted; specifically, the ballot shall not be counted if the voter has not produced sufficient identification.

Adds new section entitled "Rejection Reason Code."

Under "Audit Board Instructions," adds that optical scan arid accessible voting device tapes/printouts and a copy of the downloaded precinct results, in addition to all board logs, shall be delivered to an audit board upon the completion of each board's function.

Adds to the list of duties of the audit board; specifically, adds that the audit board: receives the optical scan and accessible voting device precinct paper tape; receives a copy of the transmitted precinct results from the election management system; verifies that the count from the optical scan and accessible voting device precinct paper tapes is the same as the count from the transmitted precinct results on the election management system; and produces a written record that the correct amounts for each candidate and issue were transmitted from the polling place to the elections management system.

Deletes section entitled "Multiprogrannning and Network Environments."

Moves "Election Reporting" to here from page 234.

Changes title to "Storage of Ballots and Reports." States that the ballots shall be delivered to the county treasurer for secure storage, but removes requirement that they be stored in the treasurer's vault.

· · - - · · · - - - - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Case 8:12-cv-01.2..9..4-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 22 PageID 367

Mr. John Tanner
June 26, 2006 Page 14 of21

Pg. 214

Under section on "Primary and General Elections," adds requirement that the Board of Supervisors shall, within 10 days after the primary election, deliver the canvass to the secretary of state.

Pg. 214-215 Adds new section on "Additional Reporting."

Pg. 218

Under section "Determining Whether Recount is Required," changes language to state that a recount is required when the margin of votes for a particular office is less than or equal to the lesser of 10 votes in an office to be filled by the electors of a city or town or a county or subdivision of a city, town or county.

Pg. 219

Under "Method of Recount," provides that ballots shall be recounted on an

electronic voting system programmed under the supervision of, and not

by, the SOS.

·

Provides that if the election for office of the SOS is contested, the electronic voting system shall be furnished and programmed under the supervision, and not at the direction, of the governor.

Adds cite to A.R.S. § 16-664.

Under section on "Registration and Voting Information," adds paragraph on Accessible Voting Device for use by voters with disabilities.

Pg.220

Removes paragraph that beginning on January 1, 2006, the board of supervisors shall provide at each polling place at least one device that complies with HAVA.

Pg.221

Under section entitled "Accessibility," adds paragraph that requires counties to submit the results of their inspections to the SOS at the same time they certify their election results.

Pg. 222

Under "Walkways and Pathways to Building," adds requirement for accessible walks that they must be free of any objects with bottom edges that are higher than 27 inches but less than 80 inches above the walkway and that extend more than four inches into the walkway.

Pg. 223

Under "Corridors and Passageways," adds requirement that they be free of any objects with bottom edges that are higher than 27 inches but less than 80 inches above the walkway and that extend more than four inches into the walkway.

Adds new language on "Stairs."

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 22 PageID 368

Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 15 of21

Pg.224

Removes paragraph that beginning on January !, 2006, the board of supervisors shall provide at each polling place at least one direct recording electronic system for voters with disabilities for each polling place that is certified for use by voters with disabilities.

Pg.227

Under "Terminology," adds definition for "Absent Uniformed Services Voter."

Modifies definition for "Accessible Voting System."

Modifies definition for "Ballot."

Pg.228

Adds definition for "Conditional Provisional Ballot."

Pg.230

Adds definition for "Overseas Voter."

Pg.232

Under definition of"Vote," modifies language under "For Accessible Voting Systems," and adds language to "For AutoMark Voting."

Adds definition for "Voting Device."

Pg.234

Moves "Election Reporting" from here to page 211.

Pg. 234-236 Moves "Auditable Formats Internet Transmission" from here to pages 8082.

Pg. 236-237 Moves "Voter Registration/Duplicate Match Information" from here to pages 82-84.

Pg. 238-269 Under "Schedule of Events," changes dates for 2006 election.

Pg.270

Adds "Equipment Certification Procedures."

Pg. 271-280 Adds new procedure for "Arizona Voting Equipment Certification."2

Pg. 281-288 Adds new procedure for "Arizona Voting Equipment Decertification."3

Pg. 289-300 Adds new procedure for "Arizona Voting Equipment Emergency Conditional Certification."4

2 The Department of Justice precleared this procedure on March 2, 2006 (DOJ File #2006-0514). 3 Please see footnote 2. 4 Please see footnote 2.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 22 PageID 369

Mr. John Tarmer June 26, 2006 Page 16 of21

Pg. 301-302 Reorganizes and adds to "Sample Forms." Specifically, the following Sample Forms were added:

Under "Voter Registration," the National Voter Registration Form was added.

Under "Military and Overseas Voters," the Federal Post Card Application and the Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot were added.

Under "Uniform Correspondence," all of the forms listed were added.

Under "Early Voting," Accessible Voting Device Affidavit was added.

Under "Polling Place," Identification at the Polls Requirements for Voters was added.

Under "Additional Reporting Forms," all of the forms listed were added.

Pg.309

Provides sample of the National Voter Registration Form.

Pg. 310

Provides sample of the Federal Post Card Application.

Pg. 311

Provides sample of the Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot.

Pg.314

Provides sample of2"d Notice That Citizenship Documentation Needed.

Pg.315

Provides sample of AZ DLN Number Did Not Match at MVD.

Pg. 316

Provides sample of Citizenship Proof needed.

Pg. 317

Provides sample of Jury Questionnaire- Felon.

Pg. 318

Provides sample of Jury Questionnaire- Citizenship.

Pg.319

Provides sample of Felony ConviCtion.

Pg. 320

Provides sample of Connty Recorder Naturalization Ceremony Certification.

Pg. 321

Provides sample of Recorder's Certificate.

Pg.322

Adds line at bottom of document to which candidate must sign his/her name that he/she has read all applicable laws relating to campaign financing and reporting.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 22 PageID 370

Mr. John Tanner
JW1e 26, 2006 Page 17 of21

Pg. 323

Adds line at bottom of document to which candidate must sign his/her name, that he/she has read all applicable laws relating to campaign fmancing and reporting.

Pg. 324

Adds line at bottom of document to which candidate must sign his/her name that he/she has read all applicable laws relating to campaign financing and reporting.

Pg. 325

Adds line at bottom of document to which candidate must sign his/her name that he/she has read all applicable laws relating to campaign financing and reporting.

Pg. 326-327 Moves "Sample Failure to File Notice" here and updates it for current election.

Pg. 328

Provides sample of Accessible Voting Device Affidavit.

Pg. 330

Reformats and updates the Precinct Election Supplies Inventory List.

Pg. 331

Moves "Instructions to Voters and Election Officers" to here.

Adds language that voter should provide identification documents to the election officer in charge.

Pg. 332

Moves "Right to Vote a Provisional Ballot" to here.

Adds the following to the circumstances m1der which a person has a right

to vote a provisional ballot:

•

If the voter requested an early ballot but did not vote an early

ballot.

•

If the voter has not produced sufficient identification.

•

If the voter was challenged as a qualified voter.

Provides that to vote a provisional ballot, the voter must sign an affirmation on the provisional ballot envelope stating that information filled out on the provisional ballot envelope is correct, that he/she resides in the precinct, that he/she is eligible to vote in this election and that he/she has not previously voted in this election.

Adds language on what happens after a provisional ballot is placed in a provisional ballot envelope; specifically, that the voter will be given information on how to present sufficient identification to the county recorder if necessary.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 22 PageID 371

Mr. John Tanner JlU1e 26, 2006 Page 18 of21

Pg. 333

Provides new instructions on "Identification at the Polls- Requirement for Voters."

Pg. 336

Provides sample "Polling Place Setup."

Pg. 340

Provides sample "Write-In Tally Sheet."

Pg. 341

Deletes ''Note" at the bottom of the "Master Audit Form Format" sheet.

Pg. 342

Reformats "Master Audit Form."

Pg. 344

Provides sample reporting form for "Equipment, Software and Firmware Certification Statement."

Pg. 346

Provides sample "Cover Sheet for Additional Reports."

Pg. 347

Provides sample "Accessibility Report."

Pg. 348

Provides sample "Poll Worker Training Report."

Pg. 349

Provides sample "Voter Education Report."

Pg. 350-351 Provides sample HAVA Administrative Complaint forms in English and Spanish.

Technical, grammatical and formatting changes also are made.

D. PERSON MAKING THE SUBMISSION.

Terri Sk!adany, Chief Assistant Attorney General Mary O'Grady, Solicitor General Diana L. Varela, Assistant Attorney General 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-7993

E. SUBMITTING AUTHORITY.

The State of Arizona. ,

F. COUNTY AND STATE OF SUBMITTING AUTHORITY.

Not applicable since the submission is from the State.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 22 PageID 372
Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 19 of21
G. PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR CHANGE.
The Secretary of State adopted the Procedures Manual, which was approved by the Arizona Governor and the Attorney General's office as required by A.R.S. § 16-452(B).
H. AUTHORITY FOR MAKING CHANGE.
The Secretary of State has the authority and duty to adopt the Procedures Manual pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-452(B).
I. DATE OF ADOPTION.
The Arizona Secretary of State adopted the revised Procedures Manual on March 28, 2006 and submitted revisions following consultation with the Governor and Attorney General's office on May 15, 2006 and June 14, 2006. The Attorney General's office approved the Procedures Manual on June 19, 2006, and the Governor approved the Procedures Manual on June 20, 2006. The Approval letters are attached as Exhibit D.
J. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The Procedures Manual will become effective upon preclearance by the United States Department of Justice. Early voting, however, begins on August 10, 2006 for the primary election. Voter registration closes August 14, 2006 for the primary election.
K. ENFORCEMENT OF CHANGE.
Arizona has begun implementing its proof of citizenship requirement and rules for identification at the polls after the Department of Justice precleared Proposition 200 in January 2005, and the Secretary of State's Procedure for Proof of Identification at the Polls on October 7, 2005. In addition, the Secretary of State's procedures for election equipment certification, decertification and emergency conditional certification have been in effect since precleared by the Department of Justice in early 2006. As far as the State is aware, additional changes contained in the Procedures Manual have not yet been enforced or administered.
L. SCOPE OF CHANGE.
The changes affect the entire jurisdiction.
M. REASONS FOR THE CHANGE.
The Arizona Secretary of State is required to adopt a Procedures Manual for each statewide election. See A.R.S. § 16-452. The changes in the 2006 Procedures Manual were adopted to conform to recent amendments to Arizona law, such as amendments required by HAVA and changes froin Proposition 200 following the general election of2004.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 22 PageID 373
Mr. Jolm Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 20 of21
N. ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON MEMBERS OF RACIAL OR LANGUAGE MINORITY GROUPS.
The changes contained in the Procedures Manual were made without discriminatory intent and will have no discriminatory effect on members of racial or language minority groups.
0. PAST OR PENDING LITIGATION.
The June 2006 Procedures Manual is not the subject of litigation. However, in obtaining preclearance of Proposition 200, the State advised the Department of Justice of two challenges that attempted to remove Proposition 200 from the ballot before the 2004 general election.5 The State also informed the Department of Justice of a lawsuit challenging the voting-related provisions of Proposition 200 shortly after the general election in 2004. 6 The district court dismissed that suit for lack of standing, and was afftrmed by the Ninth Circuit.
Several plaintiffs ftled a more recent, consolidated challenge to Proposition 200 that is presently being litigated in federal court.7 The suit alleges that the proof of citizenship requirement is preempted by the NVRA when applied to the federal voter registration form. The suit also alleges that the proof of citizenship requirement and rules regarding identification at the polls violate the 24th Amendment, deny equal protection, and violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
In an Opinion and Order dated June 19,2006, the district court judge denied the plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order with regard to Arizona's proof of citizenship requirement. The Court held that plaintiffs have not shown there is a likelihood they will succeed on the merits regarding their preemption claim under the NVRA.
On June 20, 2006, the Navajo Nation filed an action in federal court8 seeking to enjoin the Secretary of State from implementing the voter identification requirements of Proposition 200 at polling places located on the Navajo Reservation.
P. PRECLEARANCE OF PRIOR PRACTICE.
The Department of Justice precleared the current Procedures Manual on October 5, 2004 (DOJ ftle number 2004-3400). Arizona revised the current Manual to add procedures in the wake of Proposition 200 regarding proof of identification at the polls. The Department of Justice precleared the revision on October 7, 2005 (DOJ file number 2005-2943).
'SEIU, AFL-CIO, eta/. v. JaniceK. Brewer, eta/., Maricopa Co. Superior Court Cause No. V2004-015592; No On 200, Arizonans for Real Immigration Reform, et at. v. Jan Brewer, eta/., Maricopa Co. Superior Court Cause No. CV2004-020468. 6 Friendly House, eta/. v. Janet Napolitano, eta/. Federal District Court Cause No. CV 04-649 TUC DCB. 7 Gonzalez, eta/. v. State ofArizona, eta/ (Lead); Inter-Tribal Council ofArizona, eta/. v. Brewer (Cons.), District Court Cause No. CV06-0 !268. 8 The Navajo Nation v. Jan Brewer, et o/., Federal District Court Cause No. 3:06-cv-01575-EHC.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-15 Filed 07/27/12 Page 22 of 22 PageID 374
•
Mr. John Tanner June 26, 2006 Page 21 of21
If you have any questions regarding this submission or if you require any additional information, please contact me as soon as possible.
Very truly yours,
Terri Skladany
~arela varJL ChiefAssistant Attorney General
Mary O'Grady
Sofidro<·;~
Assistant Attorney General
Attachments
#472730, v. 3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 1 of 24 PageID 375
Exhibit 10

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 24 PageID 376

From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments:

Phillips. Eddie L. Phillips. Eddie L. List Maintenance of Potentional Non-Citizen Matches Monday, April 23, 2012 5:17:52 PM vivafi45.pog

Good afternoon Supervisors!

The SOE website has been updated with a revised PowerPoint presentation for List

Maintenance of Potential Non-Citizen Matches.

·

Link to Webinar PowerPoint

Also, a sample word document and form is provided for your convenience. As discussed in the PowerPoint, you may attach a copy of the DAVE screenshot associated with the file.
Link to sample word document
Link to sample form

Dr. Gisela Salas, Director Florida Division of Elections

Florida is headed in
the right direction!
Click to Enlarge

The Department of State is leading the commemoration of Florida's 500th anniversary in 2013. For more information, please go to www.fla500.com.
The Department of State is committed to excellence. Please take our Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 3 of 24 PageID 377
Pr'ocessing l:neH,giblle Reg'iste;red ,Voters,. Jf\)on-l:m:miig,ra,n.ts;
Pres'ent;ed by:: ··· Dr.Christopfiet,shai,> Chief··
1
Bureau ofVoter Registrati'on Services April2o;I2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 4 of 24 PageID 378

FVRS voter registration records matched against DHSMV/s DAVE records

:1256 registered voters identified in this batch as \nonimmigrants/ in DAVE and therefore potentially ineligible.

Non-immigrant: Someone who is legally authorized to be

in the U.S. for a limited period of time and for specific

.

.

.

.

activity or purpose.

Non-immigrant: Subject to annual renewal of driver/s license or state ID card every year.

2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 5 of 24 PageID 379

Temporary visitor for business or pleasure

Diplomat or other foreign government official
~ Students: academic1 vocational
Researcher

Person in special or highly skilled occupation

Temporary agricultural or seasonal worker

Exchange Visitor

Religious worker

Entertainer

Media1 journalist Au pair

Victim of human trafficking or other criminal activity

A person seeking safe haven from dire homeland situations like civil

war1 natural disaster or other extraordinary conditions

3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 6 of 24 PageID 380
Review of DHSMV DAVE database-initial screen:
nNot a U.S. Citizen~~ status Foreign Count of Birth listed Supporting ID documents to comply with federal REAL ID Act
• REAL ID Act requires persons to provide documentary proof oflegal status whenever they apply or renew a driverfs license or state ID card.
• By December 1., 2.01.7, the cycle for all renewals will be completed and every record in DAVE will have supporting documentation oflegal status in orderfor issuance or renewal of driverfs license or state ID card.
• (For persons born after December 1., 1.964, proofmust be provided by December 1., 201.4.)
4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 7 of 24 PageID 381
Review of REAL ID compliant documentation for legal status of non-U.S. citizens:
~ Passp rt (country of origin) ~Visa
Birth certificate ~\\Green cardu for legal permanent resident (not a U.S.
citizen)· ~ ther government issued document authorizing
tempora stay
5

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 8 of 24 PageID 382
Cross-check of ICE's public online site regarding non U.S. citizen detainees
I
ICE: Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). One of the 3 bureaus besides CIS (Citizenship and Immigration services) and CBP (Customs and Border Patrol) that serves as successor to INS. NOTE: A DOS request is currently pending before DHS to access a federal database (such as SAV --Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) and/or other federal databases in order to cross-check whether a non U.S. citizenls legal status has changed since obtaining a driver's license or state ID card.
6

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 9 of 24 PageID 383

CNTY

OF

FVRS

RESIDENVTR

CE

ID

FVRS VTR FVRS REG REG STAT DATE

CAL

123456789ACT

MIDD

LAST

LE_N

HSMV_LICENSE_ HSMV_G HSMV_BJRTH

NAME FIRST_NAME AME HSMV_SSNNO

ENDER DATE

Verificationstatus

LastDHMV transaction date Reviewer

verified thru dave, non US citizen; 6/10/197Sverified through ICE

Me 11123/20 113-13-12

These are our match

Notes from examiner that supporting documents were viewed to verify citizenship status, and citizenship status

Last date individual went to DHSMV

Reviewer initials and date

items before we look for

supporting documents. At

least three criteria must be

exact in FVRS and DAVE

7

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 10 of 24 PageID 384
Follow steps in section g8.075(6) and (7), F.S., as
you would for any other potentially ineligible voter:
~~ Review file information [Note: These files are not compiled
electronically in the same way that the Division compiles felon or mental incompetency files. There are no attached scanned images or documents in these files.]
~~ Conduct any additional research [Refer to whatever other
sources you have to confirm identity and potential change in legal status. You should all have access to DHSMV's DAVE. If you find information credible and reliable1 proceed.]
8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 11 of 24 PageID 385
3· Initiate notice (within 7 days). Send notice by certified -mail1 return receipt requested or by some other means of verified
delivery). Notice must include:
A statement of basis for ineligibility A copy of any supporting documentation
• Print out the latest screen shot from the DHSMV DAVE containing legal status. This is what DHSMV has last recorded.
• Redact confidential/personal identifying information such as DL, state ID #, SSN, and signature. _
A statement that failure to respond within 30 days may result in removal from rolls A return form that requires voter to admit or deny accuracy of information A statement that a person denying ineligibility has a right to a hearing
Contact information for Supervisor of Elections Instructions for seeking restoration of civil rights (Not applicable in these cases)
9

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 12 of 24 PageID 386

MAN Driver And Vehicle Express (MbAViE)

!4>w<:C:oa:t"
03Lnl1LU

s~
Y-'ILID
..~ ~
.s·u;

10

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 13 of 24 PageID 387

Samp e
tice t
Send
P tentially
Ineligible
N n- " .
iti en

(Date)
(Voter's name and address) (Voter Reg. No.)

The

Cownty Supe.-viso,- of Elections has >eceived inforn.:mtion fron1 the

Horida Division of Elections that ca!ls into question your eligibility to be rL"gistercd to vote.

The int'Ormation originated from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor

Vehic.les (see al.iached) which li:>1s you as not being a U.S. citizen. ln Flnrida. only U.S.

Citizens can register and v-ote. Sec s. 97.04!, Fla. Stat (2{)U).

Please complete and returo the enclosed 'voter eligibility form· to the Supervisor of Elccti.ons· office within thirty (30) days ofreceipt

If you. believe we have made a mistake about your identity or citizenship st<rtus, or you have
acquired citizenship since your last intemctio11 ,.-vfth DHSMV, please m.clude with the "voter
eligibility form' a eopy of any document that either shows that you are not the person identified in this l:etteror that you are a U.S. citizen. ~Dle fo!lov.1ug documents are examples of proof of U$. citizensitip: U.S. Birth Certificate. Passport, U.S. Consular Certificate of Birth, or U.S. Certificate Gf N~itation. If your nan•e has changed or you use another name ditt¢rent fr<Jm that ou the document ple<l-<;e inch<&~ a copy of the d<x:ume;:rt:. sho\.'-elng that nanw cr.ange. You also have the right to noque~:t a hearing if you deny• that: the
in:eligibllity information is. accurate.

You m<JiY mail, fa:,; or e-mail the voter eligibility fonn and supporting documentation or you can come in person v..eith tilat fonn and any supporting oocrunent to the Supervisor of Elections' office. If :vou fail to respond within thirty (30) days,. we may detennine that
you a~:e ineligjble and <emove your name from th.e voter regi$tration t:oJls. You will
th<>n no longer be eligibl¢ to voft>_

You may reach our oft"ices as follo,..-s: [insert contact information including phone number, physical street address, mailing address, fax number nnd e-mail address.]

Supervisor ofEleetions
Enclosures: Voter Eligibility Form \Vith Se.lf-addre:,-sed Return Envelope DAVE Sc.reen shot

11

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 14 of 24 PageID 388
1m Allow voter 30 days to respond (if you receive
verification that mail delivered)
Soo Publish notice ONLY if notice undeliverable (Section
g8.075(7)(a)2.a.-e1 Fla. Stat.)
~~ Provide hearing ONLY if person denies ineligibility
AND person requests hearing
12

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 15 of 24 PageID 389

Sampe
\ ter
Eligibility
F rm/t Send t
ter

VOTER ELIGIBILITY FoRM

1. You have been id.entified as potentially ineligibl.e to be registered to ·vote.. 2. 1fyou do not respond within thirty (3(l) day>< after receiving dlis notice, the supervisor ofelections ro.-.y
d<:-termine that you are ineligible tu be registered to vote and remove yuu1· name from the voter
regjstratiou system.

l LastN:ame

PLEAS£ PRINT

Middle

Date of Birth (MMDDYY)

I

I <rt,nder (please c--ircle)

Driver's License No oc Florida ID Card No.

ILast 4 S<!ciai Security No.

0 Under penalties. ofpCij.ury. I swear or afimn that the information that I am ineligibie is inaccurate
Al'-."D: _ _I request a heru:ing. (Pie..a«e bring whatev.er docmn.:cnts you have in s<:~pport of your eligibility), OR
___r do not r»quct>"'t ru hearing. Please :roe attached document in suppQrt of my -eligibility. DO
NOT lMAIL ORIGINAL.
S!GNAThKE OF VOTER; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DATE: _ _ _ __ {It is a criminal oft<:n.<;c to knowingly make a false statement in writing with the intent w mislead a publk official iu the pcrfom1ancc ofhis or her official duty. s. 337,\>6. Fla. Stat,)
.Return form to: {insert c.:mtact informatioo: fax. e-mail, mailing an.d physical addresses)

13

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 16 of 24 PageID 390
7m Review proof of U.S. citizenship if provided
U.S. Passport Booklet or Card U.S. Bi h Certificate U.S. Certificate of Consulate Birth U.S. Certificate of Citizenship
v' U.S. Certificate of Naturali ation
* if there is a difference in name, the voter should provide the documentation supporting
the name change, the voter will have to provide court order or marriage license showing authorized name change.
® Remember: 1.. If a person has dual citizenship with the U.S. and another country, he or
she is still eligible to register and vote as a U.S. citizen. 2. Persons born in certain U.S. territories (e.g., Puerto Rico, island ofGuam, Panama Canal, Virgin Islands, etc.), he or she may be a U.S. citizen. Contact USCIS for confirmation
14

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 17 of 24 PageID 391

U.S. PASSPORT

CERTIFICATE OF CITIZENSHIP
SJ\MPLE .' ,::~,.;,,, .C:S""' -~'f {<_~;,.

15

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 18 of 24 PageID 392

CERTIFICATE OF NATURALIZATION

CONSULAR REPORT OF BIRTH ABROAD

16

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 19 of 24 PageID 393

U.S. BIRTH CERTIFICATE SAMPLE -FLORIDA

U.S. BIRTH CERTIFICATE SAMPLE -TEXAS

17

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 20 of 24 PageID 394

a. Determine eligibility of person based on information
you have

g. If ineligible, remove voter's name from rolls

nKu 10.. Record the 'removal reason code/ as

for not

U.S. citizen

.

.

.

. Send notice to the voter regarding removal

12. Retain record permanently as they are part of the voter registration records. see item #~ss/ GS-3
http:IIdIis. dos.state.fl. uslbarmIgenscheduIesIGS3. pdf

18

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 21 of 24 PageID 395
It is strongly encouraged but not required (for continuing registration purposes) that a registered voter who is determined to be a U.S. citizen to contact DHSMV to correct or update his or her legal status on record.
1)Refer person to _DHSMV/s website .
2) Provide DHSMV/s \\in-person// contact: 8so-6~7-2ooo
19

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 22 of 24 PageID 396
If you determine that a registered voter initially identified as not a U.S. citizen has subsequently become a U.S. citizen1 this person shall be deemed eligible for purposes ~f continuing registration and should not be removed from the rolls.
HOWEVER1 the matter should be referred to the State Attorney. See Section 104.011 (false swearing of an application) and Section 104.421 F.S. (\duty to report fraudulent registration and illegal voting').
20

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 23 of 24 PageID 397
If you determine that a registered voter is eligible for whatever reason (e.g., mismatch-
misidentification, obtained U.S. citizenship,
administrative error, etc.) then the voter's shall not be removed from the rolls.
1~~ N TIFY immediately the chief of the Bureau of Voter Registration Services .
2m PR IDE the registered voter's name and FVRS No.
This will help to ensure the integrity and improve the process.
21

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 22-16 Filed 07/27/12 Page 24 of 24 PageID 398

QUESTIONS SUGGESTIONS COMMENTS
For further information or questions1 contact: Dr. Christopher Sharp1 .
Chief1 Bureau of Voter Registration Services Florida Department of State

~~~- ·

. . . ...

· ·-···-

22

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner, Docket No. 8:12-cv-01294 (M.D. Fla. Jun 08, 2012), Court Docket
General Information

Case Name Docket Number Court Nature of Suit

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner 8:12-cv-01294 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Civil Rights: Voting

© 2012 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. For terms of service see bloomberglaw.com // PAGE 1 Document Link: http://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms/document/X1Q6M8ACD382?documentName=28.xml

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, and PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CASE NO: 8:12-cv-1294-T-27MAP

Three Judge Court (CRW, JDW, JSM)

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.
----------------------------~'
ORDER

BEFORE THE COURT1 is the Secretary's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint

(Dkt. 25). Defendant Ken Detzner, in his official capacity, moves to dismiss the First Amended Complaint on the ground that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs oppose the motion to dismiss (Dkt. 27). The

United States has also filed a Statement of Interest (Dkt. 22) and a Supplemental Statement of

Interest opposing the motion to dismiss (Dkt. 26). For the reasons set forth below, the Secretary's

Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25) is due to be denied.

Applicable Standard

Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint provide "a

short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief," in order to "give

1 This Court has properly been convened as a three-judge court under 28 U.S.C. § 2284 and 42 U.S.C. § 1973c.

the defendant fair notice ofwhat the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Bell At/. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
Although a complaint need not include detailed factual allegations, it must contain sufficient factual allegations, which, when taken as true, "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." !d. "The plausibility standard is not akin to a 'probability requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully." !d. "[W]here the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged - but it has not 'show[n] '-'that the pleader is entitled to relief."' Id. at 679 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)). A well-pleaded complaint, however, may survive a motion to dismiss even if it appears ''that recovery is very remote and unlikely." Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 555 (quoting Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974)).
While the Court must accept all factual allegations as true in evaluating a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the tenet does not apply to legal conclusions. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 677-78. Similarly, a court may dismiss a complaint on a dispositive issue of law. Marshall County Bd of Educ. v. Marshall County Gas Dist., 992 F.2d 1171, 1174 (11th Cir. 1993).
Introduction Plaintiffs allege that Defendant failed to obtain preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c (the "Voting Rights Act"), before implementing certain changes in standards, practices, and procedures affecting voting in five counties covered by the Voting Rights Act. See First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 20), ~ 2. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and
2

injunctive reliefprohibiting Defendant from continuing to implement the alleged changes unless and until Defendant obtains Section 5 preclearance from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney General. See id. at~ 3.
The only question before the Court on the pending motion to dismiss whether the Complaint contains sufficient allegations to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In ruling on the motion to dismiss, the Court is not adjudicating the underlying merit of Plaintiffs' claims. As discussed below, while a substantial question exists whether Defendant has implemented a change subject to preclearance under the Voting Rights Act, the allegations in the Complaint are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
Background On June 6, 2012, Mi Familia Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), filed this action against Ken Detzner, as Florida Secretary of State ("Defendant"). Plaintiff Murat Limage is ofHatian descent. First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 20), ~ 14. Plaintiff Pamela Gomez is of Hispanic, specifically, Dominican descent. Id. at~ 15. Both Limage and Gomez are residents ofHillsborough County, Florida, citizens ofthe United States, and are legally registered to vote in Florida. I d. at~~ 14-15. Although legally registered and entitled to vote in Florida, Limage and Gomez assert that they are concerned that they will not be permitted to vote in the upcoming election due to actions taken by Defendant in an attempt to remove unauthorized voters from voter registration lists. See id. at~~ 56, 59. PlaintiffMi Familia Education Fund ("Mi Familia") is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to working with the Latino community to increase civic participation through increased voter registration and voting by eligible Latino citizens. Id. at~ 16. Mi Familia contends that
3

Defendant's recent efforts to remove unauthorized voters from voter registration lists will interfere with its efforts to register eligible voters and force it to divert resources from its regular activities.

!d. at ~~ 16, 60.

The Database Matching Program

In the Spring of 2012, the Florida Division of Elections (the "Division") announced its intention to use a database-matching program to develop lists of registered voters that it classified as suspected non-citizens and to furnish the lists to individual Supervisors of Elections with the directive that they attempt to contact the individuals identified by the Division and, if appropriate, remove them from the voter rolls (the "Database Matching Program"). See, e.g., id. at~~ 25, 32. Plaintiffs allege that prior to the creation of the Database Matching Program, Florida had no legally-enforceable procedure for systematically instituting voter registration list maintenance procedures against individual registered voters based on citizenship information maintained by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DHSMV"). !d. at~ 24.
The Division originally generated its lists of suspected non-citizens by companng information maintained by the DHSMV with the Florida Voter Registration System ("FVRS") database. ld at~ 2. Specifically, the Division compared the list of individuals registered to vote in the FVRS database to the list of individuals identified as non-citizens in the DHSMV database. See id. at~ 25. Plaintiffs contend that this procedure was flawed in numerous respects and produced lists that erroneously targeted lawfully-registered voters, including a disproportionate share ofracial and language minorities. !d. at~~ 35-36.2 For example, Plaintiffs note that the DHSMV database failed

2 This Court lacks the authority to consider whether the Database Matching Program does or does not have a discriminatory purpose or effect. See Perkins v. Matthews, 400 U.S. 379, 385 (1971) ("What is foreclosed to such district court is what Congress expressly reserved for consideration by the District Court for the District of Columbia
4

to take into account situations when an individual became a naturalized United States citizen after
obtaining a Florida drivers' license. !d. at 23. The Division recently revised the Database Matching
Program to include new information available via the United States Citizenship and Immigration
Service's Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements ("SAVE") database. See, e.g., id. at~~ 2,
Florida and the Voting Rights Act
The Voting Rights Act "was designed by Congress to banish the blight of racial
discrimination in voting, which ha[d] infected the electoral process in parts ofour country for nearly
a century." South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 308 (1966). Five Florida counties-
Hillsborough, Monroe, Collier, Hendry, and Hardee- are covered jurisdictions under Section 5 of
the Voting Rights Act. See 28 C.F.R. Pt. 51, App.; see also 41 Fed. Reg. 34329 (Aug. 13, 1976);
40 Fed. Reg. 43746 (Sept. 23, 1975). "Section 5 requires covered jurisdictions to obtain what has
come to be known as 'preclearance' from the District Court for the District of Columbia or the DOJ
before 'enact[ing] or seek[ing] to administer' any alteration oftheir practices or procedures affecting
voting." Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 412 (2008). There is no dispute that Defendant did not
or the Attorney General-the determination whether a covered change does or does not have the purpose or effect 'of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color."'). The goal of a three-judge district court facing a § 5 challenge must be to ensure that the covered jurisdiction submits its election plan to the appropriate federal authorities for preclearance as expeditiously as possible." Lopez v. Monterey County, Cal., 519 U.S. 9, 23 (1996) (Lopez 1). Thus, the only issues before the Court are whether Section 5 covers the Database Matching Program, whether Section 5's approval requirements were satisfied, and if the requirements were not satisfied, what temporary remedy, if any, is appropriate. Jd at 24.
3 Defendant originally sent a list of2,600 potential non-citizens to county Supervisors of Elections during May 9, 2012. Id at~ 32. After concerns arose regarding the accuracy of the information contained in this initial list, Defendant indicated that on or before June 27, 2012, Florida had temporarily ceased furnishing Supervisors ofElections with lists of suspected non-citizens. Jd at~ 40. The Division recently indicated its intention to resume the Database Matching Program after the Department of Homeland Security informed Florida that it would provide access to the SAVE database. See id at~~ 43, 45
5

submit the Database Matching Program for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

See 28 C.F.R. §§ 51.26-51.28.

Contentions

Defendant argues that dismissal is warranted because (1) the State ofFlorida is not a covered jurisdiction under Section 5 ofthe Voting Rights Act, (2) Plaintiffs have failed to identify any change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5 preclearance, and (3) Plaintiffs seek to bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section 5 violation that exists in only five ofFlorida's 67 counties. Plaintiffs respond that the motion to dismiss should be denied because substantial

authority supports their claims and they should be afforded an opportunity to conduct discovery in

support of those claims.

Covered Jurisdiction

Defendant argues that the State ofFlorida is not a coveredjurisdiction under Section 5 ofthe

Voting Rights Act. In response, Plaintiffs argue that Defendant is the proper party because he developed the new voter purge procedures at issue, he maintains control over the relevant information and decision-making, and he is the appropriate state election official to submit the new

voter procedures for preclearance on behalf of the covered counties.

The Supreme Court has recognized that in states only partially covered by Section 5, "§ 5's preclearance requirement applies to a covered county's nondiscretionary efforts to implement a voting change required by state law, notwithstanding the fact that the State is not itself a covered jurisdiction." Lopezv. Monterey County, 525 U.S. 266,282 (1999) (Lopez II). Morever, "[a] State, whether partially or fully covered, has authority to submit any voting change on behalfofits covered jurisdictions and political subunits." 28 C.F.R. § 51.23. At least one district court has recognized

6

that "Congress intended that either the legislative body that enacted the legislation or the executive body that was responsible for administering the legislation would be responsible for obtaining preclearance." Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F.Supp. 2d 1150, 1156 (D. S.D. 2002)
Under the facts alleged in this case, Secretary Detzner is an appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action because his office adopted and is responsible for administrating the Database Matching Program. See Bone Shirt, 200 F.Supp. 2d at 1156 (holding that "[u]nder the plain meaning of the Voting Rights Act, the State of South Dakota is an entity that must secure preclearance from the Attorney General or bring a declaratory judgment action" for review ofa law passed by the state legislature that impacts voting in covered counties); see also Haith v. Martin, 618 F.Supp. 410 (D. N.C. 1985) (enforcement action brought against governor, attorney general, secretary of state, and board of elections); Clayton v. North Carolina Bd ofElections, 317 F. Supp. 915, 919 (E.D. N.C. 1970) (enjoining, in covered counties, an unprecleared state law in a partially
covered state in a case filed against state actors). In fact, it cannot reasonably be disputed that it is
Defendant that has all of the information regarding the development of the Database Matching Program and the manner by which the lists of suspect voters were generated. As a result, the Defendant is the proper party to explain the purpose and effect of voting changes he implemented. See 28 C.F.R. § 51.23 (noting that a "State is better able to explain to the Attorney General the purpose and effect of voting changes it enacts than are the individual coveredjurisdictions").4
4 As the United States notes, Florida recently filed an action in the District Court of the District of Columbia seeking Section 5 preclearance with respect to other voting changes, see Florida v. United States, No. 11-1428, 2012 WL 3538298 (D. D.C. 2012), and that "[i]t would be highly unusual for Florida to be the appropriate plaintiff to bring a Section 5lawsuit seekingjudicial preclearance but not be an appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action."
7

Change in Voting Practice or Procedure Defendant also argues that Plaintiffs have failed to identify any change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5 preclearance. Specifically, Defendant argues that the use of a new source of information to confirm voter eligibility (e.g., the DHSMV or SAVE databases) is not a change subject to preclearance because it is not a change to an existing standard, practice, or procedure. Plaintiffs counter that the changes to the manner in which covered counties remove and threaten to remove registered voters from the voter rolls represent a change in voting practices or procedures. Section 5 provides that "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting" is subject to "preclearance" in covered jurisdictions. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the phrase "standard, practice, or procedure" must be given the "broadest possible scope" in order to effectuate the articulated purposes ofthe Voting Rights Act. Allen v. State Board ofElections, 393 U.S. 544,567 (1978); accord Dougherty County, Georgia, Board ofEduc. v. White, 439 U.S. 32, 38 (1978). Covered changes are changes that bear a direct relation to voting, including changes "in the composition of the electorate that may vote for candidates for a given office." Presley v. Etowah County Comm'n, 502 U.S. 491, 502-03, 510 (1993). Even minor changes require preclearance. Young v. Fordice, 520 U.S. 273, 284 (1997). "In order to determine whether an election practice constitutes a 'change' as that term is defined in ... § 5," a court must "compare the practice with the covered jurisdiction's 'baseline."' Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 421 (2008). The "baseline" is "the most recent practice that was both precleared and 'in force or effect' -or, absent any change since the jurisdictions coverage date, the practice that was 'in force or effect' on that date." /d "The
8

question is whether the [covered jurisdiction] has enacted or is seeking to administer a practice or
procedure that is different enough from the baseline to qualify as a change." !d.
Defendant contends that the fact that Supervisors of Elections are now provided with information on citizenship that is derived from a different source than previous information "does not remotely 'change' either the citizenship 'qualification' or the long-standing 'practice' of inquiring into a registered voter's citizenship status when there is reason to do so." Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25), p. 15. However, Plaintiffs argue that prior to 2012, the State of Florida did not use the DHSMV or SAVE databases to identify suspected non-citizens in connection with its efforts to maintain voter registration rolls. See Morales v. Handel, 1:08-CV3172,21-22 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 27, 2008) (concluding that Georgia's use of driver's license and social security databases to verify voter citizenship constituted a change from baseline practices or procedures requiring preclearance under Section 5).
Defendant also argues that the Florida laws requiring the maintenance of accurate voting registrations, requiring the removal of ineligible voters from voter rolls, and allowing the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials in order to identify ineligible voters have all been precleared under Section 5. As a result, Defendant contends that construing the Database Matching Program as a "change" in voting practice, procedure, or qualification would require the Secretary to obtain preclearance any time he obtained information bearing on voter eligibility from a new source (e.g., a new government database, a newspaper article or internet report, or a tip from a private citizen). Defendant further argues that such an interpretation would directly contravene the
9

Secretary's precleared authorization to act on any "information ... that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she is not a United States citizen." Fla. Stat. § 98.705(6).5
An administrative effort to comply with a statute that has already received clearance may require separate preclearance because Section 5 reaches informal as well as formal changes. See Foreman v. Dallas County, Tex., 521 U.S. 979, 980-81 (1997) (per curiam) (quoting NAACP v. Hampton County Election Commission, 470 U.S. 166, 178 (1985)).6 Similarly, changes made in an effort to comply with federal law require preclearance when those changes reflect policy choices made by state or local officials. Young, 520 U.S. at 284. Thus, Plaintiffs argue, the mere fact that Defendant has implemented the Database Matching Program in an effort to comply with state or federal law does not necessarily exclude the program from Section 5's preclearance requirement. See Young, 520 U.S. at 285 ("Insofar as [new administrative practices] embody discretionary decisions that have a potential for discriminatory impact, they are appropriate matters for review under § 5's
preclearance process."). Defendant also argues that the Database Matching Program is not a change to the "baseline"
practice in any covered county because the covered counties have not changed the qualifications for voter eligibility or the notice-and-hearing procedure for removing an ineligible individual from the voter registration list. Plaintiffs respond that this argument ignores the practical effect of the Database Matching Program, which was developed and implemented by Defendant. See Janie v.
5 Florida has submitted other changes related to its implementation of voter registration list maintenance procedures involving the use of database matching for preclearance under Section 5. See Submission No. 2005-2390 (Dkt. 22, Ex. 1); Submission No. 2011-2197 (Dkt. 22, Ex. 2).
6 The Department of Justice specifically noted, in preclearing the statutory provisions relied on by Defendant, that those provisions were enabling in nature and, therefore, Florida was not relieved of its responsibility to seek preclearance ofany changes affecting voting proposed to be implemented or adopted pursuant to those provisions. See Statement of Interest (Dkt. 26), Ex. 1d & Ex. 2d.
10

Nelson, No. CR. 09-5019-KES, 2009 WL 5216902, at *7 (D. S.D. Dec. 30, 2009) (concluding that state representatives were proper defendants in action brought under the Voting Rights Act when they were authorized to promulgate rules relating to voting matters and voter file maintenance even though county auditor was individual responsible for removal ofvoter from list ofregistered voters).
While a substantial question exists as to whether the use of new data sources in connection with a finite number ofprospective voters constitutes a "change" to voting practices or procedures subject to Section 5 preclearance, this issue is best resolved on summary judgment rather than on a motion to dismiss. For purposes of surviving a motion to dismiss, when all factual allegations are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs have adequately pled that the Database Matching Program constitutes a change to "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice or procedure with respect to voting" subject to preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. See 42 U.S.C. §1973c(a); see also Allen, 393 U.S. 544, 567 (1978) ("Congress intended to reach any state enactment which altered the election law ofa covered State in even a minor way."). This result is also consistent with the general rule that any doubt as to whether "changes" are covered by Section 5 should be resolved in favor ofthe Attorney General's construction ofthe Voting Rights Act. See United States v. Sheffield Board ofCommissioners, 435
u.s. 110, 131 (1978).
Scope ofInjunctive Relief Defendant's final argument is that Plaintiffs seek to bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section 5 violation that exists in only five ofFlorida's 67 counties. Plaintiffs concede in their response to the motion to dismiss, however, that they only seek an injunctive relief with respect to the five counties covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
11

Conclusion The First Amended Complaint contains factual allegations sufficient to provide Defendant with fair notice of Plaintiffs' claims and those allegations, when taken as true, state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. See Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 677-78; Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 55556. While the allegations in the First Amended Complaint are sufficient to state a claim against Defendant, this Order is not, nor is it intended to be, a comment or decision on the merits of Plaintiffs' claim. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Secretary's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 25) is DENIED.
..,.,
DONE AND ORDERED this .LJ.::day of September, 2012.

Copies to: The Honorable Charles R. Wilson The Honorable James S. Moody Counsel of Record

ited States District Judge Middle District of Florida
CHARLES R. WILSON United States Circuit Judge Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
JAMES S. MOODY United States District Judge Middle District of Florida

12

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 1 of 26 PageID 402

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization; MURAT LIMAGE; PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Civil Action No.: 08:12-cv-01294

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant. _____________________________________/

THE SECRETARY’S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Defendant Florida Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner (“Secretary”) respectfully

moves, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First

Amended Complaint (DE 20). Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint “fail[s] to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), because the State is not a covered

jurisdiction under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Plaintiffs have failed to identify any

change in voting practice or procedure subject to Section 5 preclearance, and Plaintiffs seek to

bootstrap a statewide injunction based on an alleged Section 5 violation that exists, even under

their own theory, in only five of Florida’s 67 counties.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT As the United States Department of Justice recently emphasized before the Supreme

Court, “the federal and state governments have a compelling interest in excluding foreign

citizens” from the political process. Motion of the United States to Dismiss or Affirm at 11,

Bluman v. FEC, 132 S. Ct. 1087 (2012) (No. 11-275), 2011 WL 5548718. Such an exclusion is

neither an “invidious attack” on these individuals nor “a deficiency in the democratic system”;

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 2 of 26 PageID 403
rather, it is “a necessary consequence of the community’s process of political self-definition.” Id. at 15 (quoting Cabell v. Chave-Salido, 454 U.S. 432, 439 (1981)).
Plaintiffs acknowledge that “[t]he State of Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in th[e] state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America.” Am. Compl. ¶ 19. Plaintiffs also acknowledge that Florida law validly requires the Secretary to “ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records” and the Supervisors of Elections in each county (“county supervisors”) to “conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance.” Id. ¶ 20. Moreover, though Plaintiffs fail to mention it, Florida law mandates a notice-and-hearing procedure before an individual may be removed from the voter registration list. See § 98.075(7), Fla. Stat.
All of these state laws have been precleared under Section 5. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ (Ex. 1) (referenced at Am. Compl. ¶ 38); see also A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida, available at http://election.dos.state.fl.us/publications/pdf/2011/ 2011ElectionLaws_04-12-2012.pdf (last visited July 5, 2012). Plaintiffs therefore do not challenge any of these requirements or the Secretary’s compliance with them. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 18–34. And Plaintiffs do not allege that the Secretary sought to change any requirement of voter eligibility or the precleared notice-and-hearing removal procedure. See id.
Instead, Plaintiffs allege that the “change” purportedly requiring Section 5 preclearance is the Secretary’s use of a new source of information to confirm compliance with Florida’s valid voter eligibility requirements. Id. ¶ 45. In particular, Plaintiffs claimed that the Secretary violated Section 5 when he matched the voter registration list against citizenship data from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ (“DHSMV”) MAN Driver and Vehicle Express (“MDAVE”) database to identify potential non-citizens, and then transmitted
2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 3 of 26 PageID 404
that data to county supervisors, who were to initiate the statutory notice-and-hearing removal procedure where warranted. See id. ¶¶ 18–34. As Plaintiffs recognize, however, the Secretary has discontinued this MDAVE data matching. See id. ¶ 40.
Indeed, the Secretary determined that use of more recent citizenship data would facilitate more efficient identification of non-citizens registered to vote. The Secretary thus repeatedly sought—but was wrongfully and illegally denied—access to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Program database (“SAVE”) maintained by the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). See id. ¶ 42. As Plaintiffs recount, the Secretary filed suit on June 11, 2012, seeking access to SAVE, and DHS finally committed to providing that access on July 9, 2012. See id. ¶¶ 42–43; see also Fla. Dep’t of State v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, No. 1:12-CV00960 (D.D.C.). The Secretary intends to institute an additional safeguard by using SAVE to verify the current citizenship status of individuals identified as potential non-citizens through the MDAVE data matching and for whom the Secretary has unique identifiers required for SAVE verification. Only information about registered voters confirmed by SAVE as non-citizens would be transmitted to county supervisors for initiation of the statutory notice-and-hearing procedure.
Plaintiffs now allege that this SAVE data matching is a Section 5 “change” (see Am. Compl. ¶¶ 42–46), but this tortured claim fails for at least three simple reasons. First, as Plaintiffs concede, the State is not a “covered jurisdiction” under Section 5 (see id. ¶¶ 48, 50, 62; 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix)—so Section 5 does not provide a cause of action against the State. As Plaintiffs further concede, only five of Florida’s 67 counties are covered jurisdictions (see Am. Compl. ¶¶ 48, 50, 62), so Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim runs, if at all, only against those
3

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 4 of 26 PageID 405
counties. Yet the Secretary, in his official capacity on behalf of the non-covered State, is the only defendant that Plaintiffs joined and against whom they seek relief. See id. ¶ 18.
Second, even if the State were a covered jurisdiction, Plaintiffs fail to identify any change in voting practice or procedure requiring Section 5 preclearance. Indeed, Plaintiffs’ theory makes no sense because it would freeze the Secretary into using antiquated, unreliable sources of information to implement the State’s valid voter eligibility requirements unless and until more current and reliable sources received preclearance. Such a regime would impede, rather than advance, the efficient administration of precleared election laws.
Plaintiffs allege that the Secretary’s data matching was discriminatory because it generated “false positives” of registered voters who were actually citizens. See id. ¶ 36. Yet the reason that the Secretary sought SAVE data is that such data is more reliable and uniform than previously available data. Plaintiffs thus seek to prohibit the Secretary from using increasingly more accurate data to assess citizenship.
In any event, even if the State were a covered jurisdiction, the Secretary’s data matching is not a Section 5 “change” because it simply is one of many ongoing implementations of a Florida law that has already been precleared. Florida law authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records,” § 98.093, Fla. Stat., and directs him to share with the county supervisor any information indicating “that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” id. § 98.075(6). The Secretary regularly receives and transmits to county supervisors data relating to voter eligibility from a host of state and federal agencies—and merely continues that practice with the SAVE data matching.
4

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 5 of 26 PageID 406
Plaintiffs, moreover, plainly do not believe that the Secretary’s data matching is a change in any covered county because they have not even joined any such county as a defendant. See Am. Compl. ¶ 18. In fact, the only actions by covered counties that Plaintiffs identify are Hillsborough County’s use of the matched data under the now-discontinued MDAVE process “as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship” (id. ¶ 34) and Collier County’s “remov[al]” of individuals “from the voting rolls” (id. ¶ 39). But, as Plaintiffs acknowledge with their citation to “Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7),” Hillsborough County’s mailing was required by Florida’s precleared notice-and-hearing removal procedure (id. ¶ 34)— and Plaintiffs do not allege that any citizen was erroneously removed from the rolls in Collier County or anywhere else (id. ¶ 39). Thus, the Secretary’s reliance on a new source of data has changed precisely nothing in the five covered counties, which continue to act on information received from the Secretary and to remove individuals that the county supervisors determine are ineligible in accordance with Florida’s precleared notice-and-hearing procedure.
In a last-ditch effort to save their “change” argument, Plaintiffs attempt to leverage a letter from the Justice Department espousing the view that the Secretary’s MDAVE data matching was a Section 5 change. See id. ¶ 37. Yet when the Justice Department filed its own suit challenging the Secretary’s MDAVE data matching, it did not advance any Section 5 claim. See United States v. Florida, No. 4:12cv285, Order Denying A Temporary Restraining Order at 1 (N.D. Fla. June 28, 2012) (“DOJ Order”) (Ex. 2). In any event, the Justice Department’s letter and its “Statement of Interest” (“SOI”) merely repeat the fatal flaws in Plaintiffs’ position.
The Court should reject Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim and dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in its entirety. In the alternative, and at a minimum, the Court should reject Plaintiffs’ attempt to transform the alleged Section 5 violation in five covered counties into a statewide
5

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 6 of 26 PageID 407
injunction prohibiting the Secretary from implementing data matching and ordering him to “advis[e] the Supervisors of Elections,” regardless of county, to cease relying on the results from that matching. Am. Compl. ¶¶ B–C. Such a claim for relief in non-covered jurisdictions is beyond the Court’s Section 5 remedial authority and should be dismissed.
BACKGROUND A. The Secretary’s Data Matching As Plaintiffs recognize (Am. Compl. ¶ 19), Florida requires a voter in any election in the State to be “a citizen of the United States.” § 97.041(1)(a)(2), Fla. Stat. Florida law further directs the Secretary to “protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records,” id. § 98.075(1), and authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records,” id. § 98.093. It further provides that if the Secretary or a county supervisor “receives information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” the supervisor must initiate the statutory notice-and-hearing procedure and—if the supervisor determines after that process that the registered voter is, in fact, ineligible—must remove the individual from the statewide voter registration list. Id. §§ 98.075(6)–(7). All of these state laws have been precleared under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ; A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida. Congress, through the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), has imposed similar duties on the Secretary. HAVA requires the Secretary “to ensure that voter registration records in the State are accurate and are updated regularly” in order to “remove registrants who are ineligible to vote from the official list of eligible voters.” 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(4). HAVA also places a specific non-discretionary duty on the Secretary to “match information in the database of the statewide
6

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 7 of 26 PageID 408
voter registration system with information in the database of the [State’s] motor vehicle authority” in order “to verify the accuracy” of voter registration information. Id. § 15483(a)(5)(B)(i).
The Secretary and county supervisors regularly engage in data collection efforts to identify ineligible voters on the State’s voter registration list. For example, the Secretary receives monthly reports of: deceased adults from the Florida Department of Health; persons adjudicated mentally incompetent from each clerk of the circuit court; and persons who have become licensed to drive in other states from DHSMV. The Secretary also receives information from the United States Social Security Administration about registered voters who are deceased. And the Florida Department of Law Enforcement identifies persons on the voter rolls who have been convicted of a felony. See generally §§ 98.075, 98.093, Fla. Stat.
In 2011, as authorized by state law and mandated by HAVA, the Secretary worked with DHSMV to locate records in MDAVE pertaining to registered voters. This data matching produced DHSMV records of registered voters containing information preliminarily indicating that the individuals may be non-citizens, such as a foreign passport, green card, or U.S. visa. The Secretary distributed a small sample consisting of roughly 2,600 such names to county supervisors, who were to provide the identified individuals notice and an opportunity to be heard. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 25–32.
In distributing the sample of names, the Secretary reminded supervisors: The list that you will be receiving represents only non-immigrants initially identified in DHSMV’s DAVE . . . . Please remember that you are still responsible for contacting these individuals and going through the process of verifying citizenship status before making a determination of eligibility for voter registration. You must follow the same procedures, in law, that you have in the past whenever you receive information that a registered voter of yours is ineligible to be registered to vote.
7

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 8 of 26 PageID 409
Apr. 2, 2012 E-mail To County Supervisors (Ex. 3). Most county supervisors complied with their legal duty to “[n]otify the registered voter of
his or her potential ineligibility by mail within 7 days.” § 98.075(7), Fla. Stat. Over 400 voters who were notified have confirmed their eligibility to vote. Since April 4, 2012, county supervisors of elections have removed over 100 registered voters from the voter rolls after determining that those persons were non-citizens. Many of these individuals had a record of voting in prior elections. The Secretary is not aware of, and Plaintiffs do not identify, any citizen appearing on the 2,600-person sample who has been wrongfully removed from the voter registration rolls, or any individual who was removed without a supervisor complying with the notice-and-hearing procedure and determining by a preponderance of the evidence that the individual was ineligible. See, e.g., Am. Compl. ¶¶ 39, 49.
The Secretary determined that use of more recent citizenship information contained in SAVE would facilitate more accurate identification of non-citizens registered to vote. Thus, on April 30, 2012, the Secretary decided not to forward any more MDAVE data to county supervisors. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ. After DHS repeatedly and illegally denied the Secretary access to SAVE data, the Secretary filed suit seeking immediate access to that data on June 11, 2012. See Fla. Dep’t of State v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, No. 1:12-CV-00960 (D.D.C.). DHS finally agreed to grant the Secretary the SAVE access to which he is legally entitled on July 9, 2012. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 42–43; see also Press Release: Florida Department of State Receives Commitment from U.S. Department of Homeland Security to Provide Access to Citizenship Database (July 14, 2012) (Ex. 4); Press Release: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Agrees To Terms With Florida Department Of State Over Legal Status Checks Of Potential Non-Citizen Voters (Aug. 16, 2012) (Ex. 5).
8

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 9 of 26 PageID 410
Consistent with his duties under precleared state law and federal law, the Secretary intends to verify the citizenship status of the individuals identified as potential non-citizens through the MDAVE data matching against SAVE, and where that verification confirms that a registered voter is not a U.S. citizen, transmit the results of that verification to county supervisors to initiate the notice-and-hearing procedure for review and, where warranted, removal of ineligible individuals from the voting rolls.
B. Plaintiffs’ Complaint And First Amended Complaint Plaintiffs filed their initial Complaint on June 8, 2012, alleging that the Secretary’s MDAVE data matching was a Section 5 change. See Compl. ¶¶ 22–31. The Secretary moved to dismiss the Complaint on several grounds, including the fact that he had discontinued the MDAVE data matching more than a month before Plaintiffs filed the Complaint. See DE 16. Plaintiffs responded to that motion to dismiss by filing the Amended Complaint on July 27, 2012. See Amend. Compl. That same day, the Department of Justice filed its Statement of Interest responding to the Secretary’s motion to dismiss. See DE 22. The Court denied the Secretary’s motion to dismiss as moot on July 30, 2012. Plaintiffs allege to be residents of Hillsborough County and a non-profit organization. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 14–17. Plaintiffs recognize that the State is not a covered jurisdiction under Section 5 and that only five of Florida’s 67 counties—Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe—are covered jurisdictions. Id. ¶¶ 48, 50, 62. Plaintiffs nonetheless have sued and sought relief against only the Secretary, in his official capacity on behalf of the State, and have not sued any covered jurisdiction. See id. ¶ 18. Plaintiffs acknowledge that “Florida requires that, in order to vote in any election conducted in that state, an individual must be a citizen of the United States of America.” Id. ¶ 19. Plaintiffs do not challenge this citizenship requirement or allege that the Secretary’s data
9

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 10 of 26 PageID 411
matching changed the qualifications for voter eligibility. Plaintiffs, moreover, do not mention the notice-and-hearing procedure that Florida law requires to remove an ineligible individual from the voter registration list, and make no allegation that the Secretary or any other Florida official sought to change those requirements.
The gravamen of Plaintiffs’ sole claim, therefore, is that the Secretary’s “institut[ion] [of] voter list maintenance procedures based upon motor vehicles data matching and SAVE database matching constitute changes affecting voting that require Section 5 preclearance.” Id. ¶ 49. Yet Plaintiffs recognize that Florida law requires supervisors to “conduct uniform, nondiscriminatory registration list maintenance” and the Secretary to “ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” Id. ¶ 20. At the same time, Plaintiffs fail to make even a single reference to precleared state law’s express authorization to the Secretary to obtain information from state or federal agencies in order to confirm voter eligibility. See id.
Plaintiffs nonetheless contend that the SAVE data matching is “void” because the Secretary did not seek preclearance before relying on a new source of information to confirm voter eligibility. Plaintiffs further seek a statewide injunction prohibiting the Secretary from engaging in the SAVE data matching and ordering him to direct “county Supervisors of Elections,” regardless of location, to cease initiating notice-and-hearing procedures based on the results of that data matching. Id. ¶¶ 63–66, B–C.
ARGUMENT I. SECTION 5 DOES NOT PROVIDE A CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE
STATE Section 5 requires preclearance “only to the extent” that the change in voting practice or procedure “affects voting in jurisdictions properly designated for coverage.” Lopez v. Monterey Cnty., 525 U.S. 266, 284–86 (1999) (“Lopez II”) (emphasis added); see also 42 U.S.C. §
10

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 11 of 26 PageID 412
1973c(a); Holder v. Hall, 512 U.S. 874, 883(1994) (plurality op.) (“Section 5 applies only in certain jurisdictions specified by Congress.”); LaRouche v. Fowler, 77 F. Supp. 2d 80, 86 (D. D.C. 1999) (three-judge court), aff’d, 529 U.S. 1035 (2000). In other words, Section 5 extends only to those “jurisdiction[s] covered by section 4(b) of the [Voting Rights] Act.” 28 C.F.R. § 51.1(a). Section 5, therefore, obviously does not apply to a non-covered jurisdiction; such jurisdictions therefore are free to make changes in voting practice or procedure without first obtaining preclearance. Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 284.
Thus, Section 5 may be enforced—and provides a cause of action—only against a covered jurisdiction, not a non-covered jurisdiction. See, e.g., Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U.S. 544 (1969) (actions against officers of covered states of Mississippi and Virginia); Presley v. Etowah Cnty. Comm’n, 502 U.S. 491 (1992) (action against commission of covered political subdivision); Young v. Fordice, 520 U.S. 273 (1997) (action against officer of covered state of Mississippi); Lopez II, 525 U.S. 266 (action against covered political subdivision). This rule applies even where a non-covered state, by state law, enacts changes to voting practices or procedures to be implemented by a covered political subdivision. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 274–77. In that scenario, Section 5 provides no claim against the non-covered state, which participates in the litigation, if at all, as an intervenor. See, e.g., id. at 274 (noting non-covered state’s intervention in Section 5 suit against covered county).
As Plaintiffs acknowledge, the State of Florida is not a Section 5 covered jurisdiction, and the Secretary of State is “the chief election officer of Florida.” Am. Compl. ¶ 18; see also id. ¶¶ 48, 50, 62; 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix. Section 5 therefore provides no cause of action against the State. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77. In fact, as Plaintiffs also acknowledge, only five of Florida’s 67 counties are covered jurisdictions. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 48, 50, 62; see
11

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 12 of 26 PageID 413
also 28 C.F.R. Part 51 Appendix. Thus, Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim runs, if at all, only against those counties. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77; Allen, 393 U.S. 544; Presley, 502 U.S. 491; Young, 520 U.S. 273. Yet Plaintiffs assert their Section 5 claim only against the Secretary in his official capacity on behalf of the State. See Am. Compl. ¶ 18. Plaintiffs thus have failed to state a valid claim upon which this Court can grant relief, and their Amended Complaint should be dismissed.
Plaintiffs’ allegation that the Secretary “is required to provide written direction and opinions to the Supervisor of Elections on the performance of their official duties,” id., does not cure this pleading failure. A state legislature also provides direction, in the form of binding state law, to county election officials—yet such state laws do not transform a non-covered state into a covered jurisdiction against which a Section 5 claim may be brought. See, e.g., Lopez II, 525 U.S. 274–77. Moreover, a County “Supervisor of Elections is a constitutional officer who operates not entirely within the Secretary’s control.” DOJ Order at 2. Thus, Plaintiffs’ choice to sue only the Secretary and failure to join any covered jurisdiction is doubly fatal, and the Court should dismiss the Amended Complaint.
The Justice Department nonetheless contends (see SOI at 5–6) that the Secretary is a proper Section 5 defendant because a covered county’s voting change is subject to Section 5 preclearance even when it is mandated by the law of a non-covered state (see id. at 6 (citing Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 282)), and because a non-covered state has authority to submit a voting change for preclearance (see id. (citing 28 C.F.R. § 51.23)). But neither of these truisms suggests that a non-covered State is the proper defendant in a suit seeking to enforce Section 5’s preclearance requirement with respect to an alleged voting change in a covered jurisdiction. The dispositive point is that only a covered jurisdiction—whether county or state—is subject to
12

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 13 of 26 PageID 414
Section 5 and therefore the only entity that can potentially violate it (by seeking to administer a non-precleared change). “Florida” is no more a covered jurisdiction than “Utah” or other states without covered counties within their borders, so it cannot be enjoined to “conform” to a law which does not even apply to it. The fact that a county’s change is subject to preclearance, even when the county’s action is required by state law, and that states may submit changes on behalf of covered counties (because it is more convenient and the State is better informed) in no way changes this dispositive fact. The State is still not subject to Section 5, so any injunction requiring it to conform with the inapplicable law is inherently ultra vires.
Nor is this a situation where the State is somehow needed for complete or effective relief—an injunction against the five covered counties proscribing implementation of the unprecleared “change” would fully preclude any potential Section 5 violation. Indeed, as this very suit reflects, the only reason to name the State is to impermissibly constrain its activities in the 62 Florida counties not covered by Section 5, improperly transporting Section 5’s restrictions outside the covered counties.
The lone case the Department cites, Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F. Supp. 2d 1150, 1156 (D.S.D. 2002) (three-judge court) (cited at SOI at 5–6), only underscores that Plaintiffs have no Section 5 claim against the Secretary. The question in Bone Shirt was whether South Dakota could be ordered to submit for preclearance a law adopting a new statewide redistricting plan. See id. at 1154–57. Reasoning that “[u]nder the South Dakota constitution, the state legislature is responsible for enacting legislation to reapportion the legislative districts and it is the South Dakota legislature that has the authority to make the appropriate changes to overcome objections that arise during the preclearance process,” the two-judge majority concluded that “either the legislative body that enacted the legislation or the executive body that was responsible for
13

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 14 of 26 PageID 415
administering it [is] responsible for obtaining preclearance.” Id. at 1156. The two-judge majority therefore ordered South Dakota to submit the redistricting plan for preclearance. See id. One judge dissented on the view that “[a]ffirmatively requiring South Dakota to comply with a federal statute which does not apply to that State” is an overly “intrusive equitable remedy.” Id. at 1161 (Loken, J., dissenting).
Here, the Secretary is not “responsible for” for any alleged change to the precleared notice-and-hearing procedure for removing ineligible individuals from the voting rolls because the Secretary is merely verifying citizenship status and transmitting the results of that verification to county supervisors. Id. at 1156. As Plaintiffs recognize, the county supervisors, not the Secretary, have responsibility for initiating and administering the notice-and-hearing procedure. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 26–39. Thus, the Secretary’s data matching does not cause any of the purported changes or deficiencies in that procedure that Plaintiffs (incorrectly) allege. See id. at ¶¶ 34–39. The Secretary therefore is not the proper defendant here, and Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim runs, if at all, against the supervisors in the covered counties who are “responsible for” the notice-and-hearing procedure and any “changes” in its administration. Bone Shirt, 200 F. Supp. 2d at 1156.
Moreover, in all events, the SAVE data matching, unlike a statewide redistricting plan, is not a Section 5 change and, thus, does not require preclearance in any event. As explained below, see infra Part II, the Secretary has not enacted any new law, but instead is only discharging his statutory list maintenance duty, and nothing has changed with regard to his or the county supervisors’ practices and procedures under precleared state law and federal law.
14

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 15 of 26 PageID 416
II. THE SECRETARY’S DATA MATCHING IS NOT A CHANGE REQUIRING SECTION 5 PRECLEARANCE Even if Plaintiffs had a Section 5 cause of action against the non-covered State, the Court
still should dismiss the Amended Complaint because the Secretary’s use of a new source of information to confirm voter eligibility, whether MDAVE, SAVE, or some other source, is not a change subject to preclearance. By its express terms, Section 5 requires preclearance only where a covered jurisdiction “enact[s] or seek[s] to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from” one that already has been precleared. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a) (emphasis added). Section 5 thus extends “only to proposed changes in voting procedures,” Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130, 138 (1976) (emphasis added), resulting in a “new voting practice,” Lopez v. Monterey Cnty., 519 U.S. 9, 20 (1996) (“Lopez I”), that may retrogress the exercise of “the right to vote” of “any citizens of the United States,” 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(b) (emphasis added); see also Lopez I, 519 U.S. at 11 (“Section 5 governs changes in voting procedures, with the purpose of preventing jurisdictions covered by its requirements from enacting or seeking to administer voting changes that have a discriminatory purpose or effect.” (emphases added)).
Here, the “voting qualification” is the obvious one of citizenship and the long-standing “standard, practice or procedure” is enforcing this qualification by excluding non-citizens from the voting rolls. 42 U.S.C. 1973c(a). This basic practice—universally followed and mandated by federal law—is hardly new or a change from prior practice. The fact that the county supervisors are now provided with information on citizenship that is derived from a different source than their prior information does not remotely “change” either the citizenship “qualification” or the long-standing “practice” of inquiring into a registered voter’s citizenship status when there is reason to do so.
15

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 16 of 26 PageID 417
Thus, Plaintiffs’ theory that the Secretary or the counties need to seek Section 5 preclearance whenever they rely on a new source of information to enforce the unquestionably valid voter eligibility requirements is flawed on multiple levels. In the first place, even for the non-covered State, merely changing the information relied upon to confirm compliance with valid voter eligibility requirements is not a change. Moreover, the Secretary’s data matching is assuredly not a change in how Florida’s covered counties “administer” voting procedures, because, on Plaintiffs’ own allegations, the counties are simply continuing to enforce Florida’s valid voter eligibility requirements through the precleared notice-and-hearing procedure. Because there has been no “change[] in voting procedure” anywhere, Beer, 425 U.S. at 138, Section 5 is inapplicable and Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint should be dismissed.
A. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change In Voting Practice Or Procedure
“In order to determine whether an election practice constitutes a ‘change’ as that term is defined in . . . § 5,” a court must “compare the practice with the covered jurisdiction’s ‘baseline.’” Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 421 (2008). The “baseline” is “the most recent practice that was both precleared and ‘in force or effect’—or, absent any change since the jurisdiction’s coverage date, the practice that was ‘in force or effect’ on that date.” Id. “The question is whether the [covered jurisdiction] has enacted or is seeking to administer a practice or procedure that is different enough from the baseline to qualify as a change.” Id.
The Supreme Court applied this requirement in Presley v. Etowah County Commission, 502 U.S. 491 (1992). There, a group of plaintiffs brought suit alleging that certain changes in county governance were subject to, but had not properly received, Section 5 preclearance. See id. at 493–95. Specifically, the plaintiffs challenged a county resolution and a state law that
16

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 17 of 26 PageID 418
altered the authority and duties of various county officials, contending that these changes related to voting and had a potentially retrogressive effect on minority voters. See id. at 495–499.
The Supreme Court rejected that contention. See id. at 510. The Supreme Court pointed out that its prior cases had identified “four factual contexts” triggering Section 5’s preclearance requirement: where changes in the covered jurisdiction (i) “involve[] the manner of voting,” (ii) “involve[] candidacy requirements and qualifications,” (iii) “concern[] . . . the composition of the electorate,” or (iv) “affect[] the creation or abolition of an elective office.” Id. at 502–03. The changes in county officials’ authority did not fall within any of these categories because “[t]hey had no impact on the substantive question whether a particular office would be elective or the procedural question how an election would be conducted.” Id. at 510.
The Southern District of Texas recently applied Presley to reject a Section 5 challenge substantially similar to the one Plaintiffs advance. See Lopez v. City of Houston, No. H-09-0420, 2009 WL 1456487 (S.D. Tex. 2009), aff’d 617 F.3d 336 (5th Cir. 2010). The City of Houston Charter provided for a fourteen-member City Council, and required addition of two seats “if a determination [was] made pursuant to the Charter that the population of Houston is greater than or equal to 2.1 million people.” Id. at *1. The plaintiffs in Lopez brought suit alleging that, even though the City Controller had determined, pursuant to the Charter, that the City’s population exceeded 2.1 million people, the City Council had relied on nine year-old Census data to conclude that the City’s population remained below that threshold and, thus, that no new seats should be created. See id. The plaintiffs claimed that the City Council’s reliance on old Census data, rather than more recent population estimates, was a “change” in voting procedure requiring Section 5 preclearance. See id.
17

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 18 of 26 PageID 419
The Southern District of Texas rejected that claim for two reasons. First, the court held that the plaintiffs had failed to establish a “change” in procedure at all. See id. at *7–*8. The plaintiffs pointed to various provisions of the City Charter related to the population determination—but they failed to identify the City’s “baseline” procedure for that determination. See id. at *8. Because “[t]he plaintiffs have failed to allege that the City . . . has ever actually implemented or followed the standard that they assert is the baseline,” they could not prove that the City’s population determination was a “change” requiring preclearance. Id.
Second, the court held that, even if the City’s approach constituted a “change,” the plaintiffs still failed to state a claim because “merely changing the information relied upon or changing the procedure for determining whether a change in the size of the City Council is required is not the type of change that is subject to § 5’s preclearance requirements.” Id. at *9 (emphasis added). The court reasoned that such a change did not “fit within any of the four categories of covered changes listed in Presley” because it did “not even arguably relate to the manner of voting or candidacy requirements.” Id. And even though “[e]xpanding the number of council positions would clearly fit within the fourth [Presley] category” and “redistricting” the council districts “would fit within the third category,” changing the information relied on “to determine when the expansion of the Council and concomitant redistricting must be implemented does not have the requisite ‘direct relation to voting and the election process’ to be subject to Section 5 preclearance.” Id. (quoting Presley, 502 U.S. at 503).
1. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change For The NonCovered State
Even if the State were a covered jurisdiction, the Secretary’s data matching does not qualify as a “change” subject to Section 5 preclearance because it does not depart from the State’s precleared benchmark and, in any event, has no “direct relation to voting and the election
18

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 19 of 26 PageID 420
process.” Presley, 502 U.S. at 503. First, the Secretary’s data matching “[m]erely chang[es] the information relied upon” to comply with the governing state statutes, Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9 (emphasis added), which require determination of who on the voter registration list might be an ineligible non-citizen and, thus, subject to removal after notice and a hearing, see § 97.041(1)(a)(2), Fla. Stat.; id. § 98.075(7).
As Plaintiffs recognize, Florida law limits the right to vote to citizens and requires the Secretary and supervisors to “conduct uniform, non-discriminatory registration list maintenance” and to “ensure maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” Am. Compl. ¶¶ 19–20. Moreover, Section 98.075 requires the Secretary to “protect the integrity of the electoral process by ensuring the maintenance of accurate and current voter registration records.” § 98.075(1), Fla. Stat. It further provides that if the Secretary or a county supervisor “receives information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen,” the supervisor is to remove the voter from the statewide voter rolls in compliance with the statutory notice and hearing procedure. Id. §§ 98.075(6), (7). And Section 98.093 authorizes the Secretary to access information from state and federal officials “[i]n order to identify ineligible registered voters and maintain accurate and current voter registration records.” Id. § 98.093. All of these provisions have been precleared under Section 5. See June 6, 2012 Letter to DOJ; A Compilation Of The Election Laws Of The State Of Florida.
The Secretary long has implemented this statutory authority to obtain information bearing on voter eligibility from state and federal agencies and to transmit that information to county supervisors. The relevant precleared statutes specifically reference non-citizenship, along with out-of-state residence, mental incapacity, and felony convictions, as bases for removing ineligible individuals from the voter registration list. See § 98.075, Fla. Stat. Moreover, the
19

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 20 of 26 PageID 421
relevant precleared statute specifically authorizes the Secretary and supervisors of elections to receive information regarding voter ineligibility from new sources and to act on that information by following the statutory notice-and-hearing procedure. See id. § 98.075(6) (referring generally to “information from sources other than those identified in subsections (2)–(5)”). SAVE data matching is nothing more than the use of newly available sources of information to carry out the Secretary’s statutory duty to verify voter eligibility and to maintain the voter registration list. See id.; see also id. § 98.093. Such a legally authorized effort is not a “change” to procedure at all, much less a change requiring preclearance. Beer, 425 U.S. at 138.
Indeed, under Plaintiffs’ theory, any time the Secretary obtained information bearing on voter eligibility from a new source—whether a new government database, a newspaper article or internet report, or a tip from a private citizen—he would be required to obtain preclearance before providing that information to a county supervisor. This, of course, is not the law, see Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9, and directly contravenes the Secretary’s precleared authorization to act on any “information . . . that a registered voter is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen.” § 98.075(6), Fla. Stat.
And this theory makes no sense because it would hamstring local authorities into using antiquated, unreliable sources of information to implement precleared voting practices and procedures unless and until it received preclearance to use new, more reliable sources of information. Such a freezing of local authorities would impede, rather than advance, the efficient discharge of precleared election laws. Indeed, creating such headwinds to excluding ineligible persons impedes Section 5’s substantive goals because it diminishes the voting power of “citizens”—minority and nonminority—that is protected by Section 5. 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(b).
20

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 21 of 26 PageID 422
As this reflects, the reason the Secretary has sought SAVE data is that it is more accurate than the previously available data, and thus would reduce the number of “false positives” and the potential for ad hoc, subjective enforcement of the citizenship qualification. See Am. Compl. ¶ 36. On Plaintiffs’ construction, however, Section 5 would prevent the State from using more reliable data to assess citizenship. See id.
The Justice Department acknowledges that precleared § 98.075 “provide[s] that the Department of State and Supervisors of Election could receive information from sources that [a]re not expressly identified in the statute to determine other bases of eligibility, including citizenship.” SOI at 7. It then argues that preclearance of this “enabling legislation” does not prospectively preclear “any changes affecting voting proposed to be implemented pursuant to this legislation.” Id. (emphasis added). This is true, but simply assumes the conclusion that a new source of information for a preexisting, precleared voting practice is itself a “change affecting voting.” Here, the precleared “standard, practice or procedure,” 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(a), is using government databases as information concerning whether persons on the voting rolls possess the requisite qualifications, including citizenship. Selecting among the subset of government databases so utilized is not a change from that precleared procedure; it is simply a fully contemplated implementation of that procedure. Gathering drivers license information from a different agency than that utilized at the time § 98.075 was precleared does not change any procedure affecting voting; it utilizes the same procedure with additional, new information.
The Justice Department’s own Section 5 regulations confirm this obvious point. While those regulations list, for example, changes in “qualifications or eligibility for voting” as changes covered by Section 5, they provide no hint that changing the source of information for checking such eligibility could even potentially be a covered change. See 28 C.F.R. § 51.13. And, of
21

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 22 of 26 PageID 423
course, the fact that some jurisdictions, out of an abundance of caution or concern with costly litigation against the Justice Department over changes that cannot rationally be denied preclearance, have submitted data matching activities for preclearance (see SOI at 14–15) does not suggest that such preclearance was required.
Second, the Secretary’s data matching does not fit within any of the four Presley categories and, thus, does not have the “direct relation to voting and the election process” required to trigger Section 5. Presley, 502 U.S. at 503. On its face, the Secretary’s data matching did not “involve[] the manner of voting” or “candidacy requirements and qualifications,” and did not “affect[] the creation or abolition of an elective office.” Id. at 502– 03. And while changing the qualifications for voter eligibility affects “the composition of the electorate,” id. at 503, “[m]erely changing the information relied upon” to determine compliance with existing qualifications does not, Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9 (emphasis added). Plaintiffs concede as much because they do not allege that every administrative determination of ineligibility under Section 98.075(7) is itself subject to preclearance. The Justice Department asserts that “removing voters from the list of registered voters” is “a change in the composition of the electorate.” SOI at 12. But, again, the Secretary’s utilization of a citizen database does not in any way “remove voters” or change the qualifications for voting or the procedures for removing voters. All those stay the same; the only thing that changes is the data which is plugged into those preexisting procedures for removing ineligible voters. And, in any event, surely the Department is not suggesting that improving that data somehow impermissibly alters
22

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 23 of 26 PageID 424
the “composition of the electorate” by removing those who commit a federal crime if they try and illegally become part of the “electorate.” See § 97.041(2)(b), Fla. Stat.1
Accordingly, the Secretary’s data matching “had no impact on the . . . procedural question how an election would be conducted,” Presley, 502 at 510, and did “not even arguably relate to the manner of voting or candidacy requirements,” Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *9. The Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
2. The Secretary’s Data Matching Is Not A Change In Any Covered County
Regardless of whether the Secretary’s data matching is a change on the non-covered state level, it is not a change to the “baseline” practice in any covered county. Riley, 553 U.S. at 421. For starters, Plaintiffs apparently agree that no covered county has implemented a change because they have not joined any such jurisdiction as a defendant in this case. See Am. Compl. ¶ 18. Moreover, Plaintiffs do not allege that any covered county has changed the qualifications for voter eligibility or the notice-and-hearing procedure for removing an ineligible individual from the voter registration list. See id. ¶¶ 34, 39.
Instead, the only actions by a covered jurisdiction that Plaintiffs identify are Hillsborough County’s use of the matched data under the now-discontinued MDAVE process “as the basis for a mailing to demand that the recipients provide proof of their citizenship” (id. ¶ 34) and Collier County’s “remov[al]” of individuals “from the voting rolls” (id. ¶ 39). But, as Plaintiffs acknowledge with their citation to “Fla. Stat. § 98.075(7),” Hillsborough County’s mailing was
1 While the Supreme Court in Allen gave “a broad interpretation to the right to vote,” the Secretary’s data matching does not trigger Section 5 even under that construction because it does not “alter[] the election law of a covered jurisdiction,” relate to “the qualification of candidates or to state decisions as to which offices shall be elective,” 393 U.S. at 564–66, or, as discussed infra, fit within any of the four Presley categories.
23

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 24 of 26 PageID 425
required by Florida’s precleared notice-and-hearing removal procedure (id. ¶ 34)—and Plaintiffs do not allege that any citizen was erroneously removed from the rolls in Collier County or anywhere else (id. ¶ 39). Indeed, nothing has changed for the county supervisors in the covered jurisdictions, which, even on Plaintiffs’ theory, simply have implemented their baseline duty to initiate proceedings to remove “a registered voter” whenever they “receive[] information . . . that [he or she] is ineligible because he or she . . . is not a United States citizen.” § 98.075(6), Fla. Stat.; Am. Compl. ¶ 34; see also Riley, 553 U.S. at 421; Lopez, 2009 WL 1456487 at *8. Because no covered county has effected any “change[] in voting procedures,” Beer, 425 U.S. at 138 (emphasis added), the Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. III. PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR STATEWIDE RELIEF SHOULD BE DISMISSED
Finally, in the alternative, and at a minimum, the Court should reject Plaintiffs’ attempt to expand an alleged Section 5 violation in five Florida counties into a statewide injunction prohibiting the Secretary from implementing data matching and ordering him to “rescind[] [his] previous correspondence to county Supervisors of Elections,” regardless of their location, and “advis[e]” them “that the distributed lists should not be used for any purpose. Am. Compl. ¶¶ B– C; see also SOI at 18–19 (seeking to leverage purported “changes . . . in the covered counties” into a statewide injunction). Because Section 5 provides a cause of action against only covered jurisdictions, see supra Part I, it authorizes relief only against those jurisdictions. Lopez II, 525 U.S. at 284–86. Section 5, therefore, does not authorize relief “to the extent” that an alleged change in voting practice or procedure affects a non-covered jurisdiction. Id. at 284. Indeed, a judicial extension of Section 5 to non-covered jurisdictions—jurisdictions for which Congress has developed no record and made no findings that would justify the extraordinary prophylactic remedy of preclearance—would likely be unconstitutional. Nw. Austin Mun. Utility Water Dist. v. Holder, 129 S.Ct. 2504, 2511-12 (2009). Thus, even if Plaintiffs could establish that the
24

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 25 of 26 PageID 426

Secretary’s data matching pursuant to precleared state law were a “change” requiring preclearance—which they cannot—they would not be entitled to any relief in the 62 non-covered counties. At a minimum, the Court should dismiss all such requests for relief.2
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Court should dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (DE 20).

Dated: August 20, 2012
Daniel E. Nordby (Fla. Bar No. 14588) General Counsel *Ashley E. Davis (Fla. Bar No. 48032) Assistant General Counsel Florida Department Of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street, Suite 100 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6536 Facsimile: (850) 245-6127 Daniel.Nordby@DOS.MyFlorida.com Ashley.Davis@DOS.MyFlorida.com
*Middle District admission pending

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Michael A. Carvin Michael A. Carvin (D.C. Bar No. 366784) John M. Gore (D.C. Bar No. 502057) JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Telephone: (202) 879-3939 Facsimile: (202) 626-1700 macarvin@jonesday.com jmgore@jonesday.com
Counsel for Defendant Secretary of State Ken Detzner

2 Moreover, because Plaintiffs allege to be residents of Hillsborough County (see Compl. ¶¶ 14–15), they suffer no harm from the Secretary’s data matching in any other county and, thus, lack standing to challenge it. See, e.g., Sullivan v. Scott, No. 11-10047, 2011 WL 4954261 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2011) (dismissing statewide Section 5 claim); see generally Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992); City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 101–02 (1983).
25

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 25 Filed 08/20/12 Page 26 of 26 PageID 427 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 20th day of August, 2012, a true and correct copy of the foregoing will be sent electronically to the registered participants through the Court’s CM/ECF system.
/s/ Michael A. Carvin
26

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 48 Filed 06/25/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID 587

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs, v.

Civil Action No.: 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.

NOTICE OF DECISION IN SHELBY COUNTY STRIKING DOWN SECTION 4(b)

Defendant, Florida Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner (“Secretary”), respectfully

gives notice that the Supreme Court has issued a decision in Shelby County., Ala. v. Holder, wherein the Supreme Court “declare[d] §4(b) unconstitutional.” No. 12-96 (June 25, 2013).1

“The formula in that section can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to

preclearance.” Id. at 24. Invalidation of the coverage formula obviates the need for further

litigation in this case because it eliminates the only basis of this action—Section 5’s preclearance

requirement. (See ECF No. 20 ¶¶ 2, 61-65). Florida’s five covered counties are no longer

“covered” and subject to Section 5.

1 A true and correct copy of the Court’s slip opinion is attached as Exhibit A.

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 48 Filed 06/25/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID 588

Michael A. Carvin (D.C. Bar No. 366784) John M. Gore (D.C. Bar No. 502057)
JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 879-3939 Facsimile: (202) 626-1700 macarvin@jonesday.com jmgore@jonesday.com

Respectfully submitted,
____/s/ Ashley E. Davis____________ Ashley E. Davis (FBN 48032) Assistant General Counsel Florida Department Of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6536 Fax: (850) 245-6127 Ashley.Davis@DOS.MyFlorida.com

Counsel for Defendant, Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by

filing via CM/ECF this 25th day of June, 2013, on the following:

Dara Lindenbaum dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org

John A. Russ john.russ@usdoj.gov

Robert Kengle bkengle@lawyerscommittee.org dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org
Julie A. Ebenstein jebenstein@aclufl.org

Jenigh J. Garrett jenigh.garrett@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Interested Party

Edward McCarthy edward.mccarthy@weil.com

M. Laughlin McDonald lmcdonald@aclu.org

Edward Soto edward.soto@weil.com

2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 48 Filed 06/25/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID 589 Katie O’Connor koconnor@aclu.org Randall C. Marshall rmarshall@aclualabama.org Counsel for Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez
/s/ Ashley E. Davis____ Attorney
3

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 53 Filed 07/10/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID 662

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs, v.

Civil Action No.: 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Defendant, Florida Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner (“Secretary”), pursuant to this

Court’s Orders dated February 8, 2013 (ECF No. 45) and June 26, 2013 (ECF No. 49), give

notice that although all parties agree to dismissal of the First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 20),

agreement could not be reached with Plaintiffs that dismissal should be with prejudice, even

though the decision in Shelby County., Ala. v. Holder, No. 12-96 (June 25, 2013) invalidated the

coverage formula which subjects jurisdictions, including Florida’s five covered counties, to the

preclearance requirement in Section 5 – the sole basis for this action. (ECF No. 20 ¶¶ 2, 61-65)

(bringing only a Section 5 enforcement action). Plaintiffs cannot resuscitate this action even if

Congress creates a new coverage formula and even if some jurisdiction in Florida were covered

by it and subject to the preclearance requirement. First, any such action would be based on the

new (hypothesized) statute, not some resuscitation of this action based on the current

unconstitutional Section 5. Second, any actionable voting change would, by necessity, have to

occur after a newly covered jurisdiction was created by subsequent legislation. Thus, Florida’s

identification of potential noncitizens and removal from the voter rolls, using SAVE or MDAVE

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 53 Filed 07/10/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID 663

databases, would be the baseline, rather than a change requiring preclearance. This action should be dismissed with prejudice. A proposed order of dismissal with prejudice is attached. Date: July 10, 2013

Respectfully submitted,

Michael A. Carvin (D.C. Bar No. 366784) John M. Gore (D.C. Bar No. 502057)
JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 879-3939 Facsimile: (202) 626-1700 macarvin@jonesday.com jmgore@jonesday.com

____/s/ Ashley E. Davis________ J. Andrew Atkinson (FBN 14135) General Counsel Ashley E. Davis (FBN 48032) Assistant General Counsel Florida Department Of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6536 Fax: (850) 245-6127 JAndrew.Atkinson@DOS.MyFlorida.com Ashley.Davis@DOS.MyFlorida.com

Counsel for Defendant, Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by

filing via CM/ECF this 10th day of July, 2013, on the following:

Dara Lindenbaum dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org

John A. Russ john.russ@usdoj.gov

Robert Kengle bkengle@lawyerscommittee.org dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org
Julie A. Ebenstein jebenstein@aclufl.org

Jenigh J. Garrett jenigh.garrett@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Interested Party

2

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 53 Filed 07/10/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID 664
Edward McCarthy edward.mccarthy@weil.com M. Laughlin McDonald lmcdonald@aclu.org Edward Soto edward.soto@weil.com Katie O’Connor koconnor@aclu.org Randall C. Marshall rmarshall@aclualabama.org Counsel for Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez
/s/ Ashley E. Davis____ Attorney
3

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 54 Filed 07/11/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID 666

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs, v.

Civil Action No.: 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ONLY TO EXTENT THE SECTION 5 IS PREDICATED ON THE CURRENT SECTION 4 COVERAGE FORMULA

Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez, pursuant

to this Court’s Orders dated February 8, 2013 (ECF No. 45) and June 26, 2013 (ECF No. 49),

give notice that, while all parties agree to dismissal of the First Amended Complaint (the

“Complaint”) (ECF No. 20), Plaintiffs request that the Court dismiss the Complaint with

prejudice as to their Section 5 claim under the Voting Rights Act (the “VRA”) only to the extent

it is predicated on the coverage formula in Section 4 of the VRA held to be unconstitutional in

Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder. 2013 WL 3184629, (U.S. June 25, 2013).

“After an answer has been filed, Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

permits a plaintiff to dismiss voluntarily an action only ‘upon order of the court and upon such

terms and conditions as the court deems proper.’” Careplus Health Plans, Inc. v. Crespo, 8:05

CV 2010 T 27MAP, 2006 WL 3469524, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 30, 2006). Further, “[t]he Court

has broad discretion in determining whether to allow a voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule

41(a)(2). In most cases, a voluntary dismissal should be granted unless the defendant will suffer

US_ACTIVE:\44292474\4\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 54 Filed 07/11/13 Page 2 of 5 PageID 667
clear legal prejudice or lose a substantial right by the dismissal.” Id. (quoting and citing Pontenberg v. Boston Scientific Corp., 252 F.3d 1253, 1255 (11th Cir. 2001)). Because Defendant has not pleaded a counterclaim, Defendant will suffer no prejudice, or lose a substantial right, by Plaintiffs’ voluntary dismissal.1 As no counterclaims are pending, it is well within the discretion of this Court to dismiss the action without prejudice, or alternatively to dismiss the action with prejudice only to the extent Plaintiffs’ Section 5 claim is predicated on Section 4’s current coverage formula.
Plaintiffs acknowledge the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby holding that Section 4(b) of the VRA is unconstitutional. Defendant’s contention, however, that any action brought by Plaintiffs following a reenactment by Congress of the VRA with a new Section 4 coverage formula would be based on the new statute and “not some resuscitation of this action based on the current unconstitutional Section 5” is incorrect. Notice of Proposed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice (ECF. No. 53) (emphasis added). In fact, the Supreme Court explicitly noted that “[w]e issue no holding on § 5 itself, only on the coverage formula.” Shelby, at *18 (slip op.). Therefore, while Plaintiffs agree with Defendant that they may not bring a Section 5 claim based on the current Section 4(b) coverage formula, Plaintiffs are not foreclosed from bringing a Section 5 claim in the future should Congress reenact a new coverage formula in section 4.
Furthermore, Defendant’s proposed order of dismissal with prejudice is too broad and could be read to preclude, under the doctrine of res judicata, other viable claims Plaintiffs have based on Florida’s improper use of SAVE or MDAVE to purge voter rolls. “Res judicata bars a 1 Should this Court not order dismissal with the limited prejudice requested herein, Plaintiffs reserve the right to amend their Complaint under Rule 15 to add claims under the VRA, but that are not predicated on Section 4’s current coverage formula, to challenge the unconstitutional voting procedures undertaken by Defendant.
2
US_ACTIVE:\44292474\4\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 54 Filed 07/11/13 Page 3 of 5 PageID 668
claim in a prior case if: (1) there was a final judgment on the merits rendered by a court that had jurisdiction; (2) the cases involved the same parties or those in privity with them; and (3) the same cause of action is involved in both cases. Two cases are considered to involve the same cause of action if they arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts or are based upon the same factual predicate.” Dixon v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs Palm Beach Cnty., Fla., 12-14894, 2013 WL 1760584, at *2 (11th Cir. Apr. 24, 2013) (citation omitted). Accepting Defendant’s current proposed order of dismissal might unintentionally foreclose Plaintiffs’ claims under Section 2 or 3 of the VRA since such claims could be argued to “arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts,” – namely the use of SAVE or MDAVE to purge voter rolls. Therefore, out of an abundance of caution to avoid unintentionally impairing their constitutionally protected rights under the VRA, Plaintiffs seek an order dismissing their Section 5 claim with prejudice only to the extent it is predicated on the coverage formula in Section 4(b) that was found unconstitutional.2 Such an order would preserve Plaintiffs’ right to bring a Section 2 or 3 claim predicated on the use of SAVE or MDAVE to purge voter rolls.
The Supreme Court in Shelby, even while invalidating Section 4(b)’s coverage formula for identifying jurisdictions to which Section 5 preclearance requirements would apply, acknowledged that “voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that.” Shelby, at *4 (slip op.). To avoid a potential miscarriage of justice should a later court find a sufficient identity of 2 See e.g., Dillard v. Crenshaw Cnty., 640 F. Supp. 1347, 1366 (M.D. Ala. 1986) order dissolved, CIV.A.2:85CV1332-MHT, 2006 WL 3392071 (M.D. Ala. July 31, 2006) and order dissolved, CIV.A. 2:85CV1332MHT, 2006 WL 3923887 (M.D. Ala. Oct. 3, 2006) (acknowledging serious concerns in applying res judicata to bar claims under the VRA but concluding that “it has little choice but to dismiss the intent claim against Pickens County on the grounds of res judicata.”).
3
US_ACTIVE:\44292474\4\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 54 Filed 07/11/13 Page 4 of 5 PageID 669
parties and/or legal theory emanating from the same “nucleus of operative fact” as this litigation
– thus barring Plaintiff’s potential future action under the VRA based on res judicata principles –
a limited dismissal with prejudice, specifically delineating the claims dismissed with prejudice,
would serve the best interests of all parties. A proposed order of dismissal is attached.
Date: July 11, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Robert A. Kengle Dara Lindenbaum Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1401 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 40 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 662-8324 bkengle@lawyerscommittee.org dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org
/s/ Edward R. McCarthy
Edward Soto Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1200
Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: (305) 577-3100
Fax: (305) 374-7159 Edward.McCarthy@Weil.com
Edward.Soto@Weil.com
/s/ Julie A. Ebenstein Randall C. Marshall ACLU Foundation of Florida, Inc. 4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340 Miami, Florida 33137 Telephone: (786) 363-4434 jebenstein@aclufl.org rmarshall@aclualabama.org
/s/ Katie O’Connor M. Laughlin McDonald
4
US_ACTIVE:\44292474\4\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 54 Filed 07/11/13 Page 5 of 5 PageID 670 American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Telephone: (404) 523-2721 koconnor@aclu.org lmcdonald@aclu.org
5
US_ACTIVE:\44292474\4\99995.4408

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID 673

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, as an organization, MURAT LIMAGE, PAMELA GOMEZ,

Plaintiffs, v.

Civil Action No.: 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.

MOTION TO DISMISS ANY AND ALL CLAIMS IN PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PREDICATED ON THE COVERAGE FORMULA IN SECTION 4 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT HELD TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA v. HOLDER

Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gonzalez,

pursuant to the Court’s Orders dated February 8, 2013 (ECF No. 45) and June 26, 2013 (ECF

No. 49), and pursuant to the Court’s order at the July 12, 2013 hearing, hereby move to dismiss

any and all claims in the First Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) (ECF No. 20) predicated

on the coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act (“VRA”) held to be

unconstitutional in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 2013 WL 3184629 (U.S. June 25, 2013).

In Shelby, the United States Supreme Court held that Section 4(b) of the VRA is

unconstitutional. See id. That holding strikes the coverage formula under Section 4(b) that

determines which counties in Florida (and other jurisdictions) are covered for purposes of

Section 5 of the VRA. As a result, there are currently no covered counties in Florida and the

Supreme Court left it to Congress to determine a new coverage formula under Section 4(b).

However, the Supreme Court did not strike down Section 5 of the VRA or issue any ruling as to

US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 2 of 6 PageID 674
its constitutionality, explicitly noting that “[w]e issue no holding on § 5 itself, only on the coverage formula.” Shelby, at *18 (slip op.). Thus, Defendant’s repeated contention that any future action brought by Plaintiffs following a reenactment by Congress of the VRA with a new Section 4(b) coverage formula would be based on the new statute and “not some resuscitation of this action based on the current unconstitutional Section 5” is simply incorrect. Notice of Proposed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice (ECF. No. 53) (emphasis added). The decision in Shelby only makes it clear that for now there are no covered counties in Florida that are required to preclear under Section 5 of the VRA.1 Therefore, recognizing the full import of the holding in Shelby, Plaintiffs’ proposed dismissal order rightfully recognizes that Plaintiffs may not bring a Section 5 claim based on the Section 4(b) coverage formula struck down in Shelby.
Defendant’s proposed order of dismissal with prejudice, and its corresponding argument that dismissal of this case would bar any future Section 5 claim if Congress enacts a new coverage formula in Section 4, flies in the face of longstanding res judicata principles. “Res judicata bars a claim in a prior case if: (1) there was a final judgment on the merits rendered by a court that had jurisdiction; (2) the cases involved the same parties or those in privity with them; and (3) the same cause of action is involved in both cases. Two cases are considered to involve the same cause of action if they arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts or are based upon the same factual predicate.” Dixon v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs Palm Beach Cnty., Fla., 12-14894, 2013 WL 1760584, at *2 (11th Cir. Apr. 24, 2013) (citation omitted) (emphasis added). Under res judicata, “a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from re-litigating issues that were or could have been raised in the prior action.” Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 (1980). See also In re Piper Aircraft Corp., 244 F.3d 1289, 1296 (11th 1 Importantly, Shelby does not declare the Defendant’s use of the MDAVE and SAVE databases to purge voter rolls as valid under Section 5 of the VRA.
2
US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 3 of 6 PageID 675
Cir. 2001) (“The court next determines whether the claim in the new suit was or could have been raised in the prior action; if the answer is yes, res judicata applies.”). It is illogical for Defendant to argue the Section 5 claim at issue in this case – which is based on the coverage formula invalidated by Shelby – would be the same cause of action as a future Section 5 claim asserted on the basis of a completely different coverage formula that does not currently exist and, therefore, could not have been raised in this action.
Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ proposed dismissal order clarifies what claims are being dismissed for the benefit of counsel who are later faced with the issues raised in this litigation. Under current Eleventh Circuit law, as discussed above, res judicata applies to preclude all claims that could have been raised arising from the same nucleus of operative facts. See Burr & Forman v. Blair, 470 F.3d 1019, 1030 (11th Cir. 2006) (“Claim preclusion does not apply exclusively to those theories and claims actually raised in the prior proceeding but also encompasses all claims that could have been raised from the same nucleus of operative facts.”). Here, Defendant’s proposed dismissal order could be read to preclude, under the doctrine of res judicata, Plaintiffs’ viable claims under Section 2 or Section 3 of the VRA because they “arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts,” namely the Defendant’s use of SAVE or MDAVE to purge voter rolls. However, Plaintiffs’ potential Section 2 or Section 3 claims are not before this Court and are not the subject of any final ruling in this litigation. Therefore, out of an abundance of caution to avoid unintentionally impairing their constitutionally protected rights under the VRA, Plaintiffs seek an order dismissing their Section 5 claim with prejudice only to the extent it is predicated on the coverage formula in Section 4(b) that was found unconstitutional.2 Such an
2 See e.g., Dillard v. Crenshaw Cnty., 640 F. Supp. 1347, 1366 (M.D. Ala. 1986) order dissolved, CIV.A.2:85CV1332-MHT, 2006 WL 3392071 (M.D. Ala. July 31, 2006) and order dissolved, CIV.A. 2:85CV1332MHT, 2006 WL 3923887 (M.D. Ala. Oct. 3, 2006)
3
US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 4 of 6 PageID 676
order would preserve Plaintiffs’ right to bring a Section 2 or Section 3 claim based on Defendant’s use of SAVE or MDAVE to purge voter rolls.
The Plaintiffs’ proposed order dismissing their Section 5 claim with prejudice only to the extent it is predicated on the current coverage formula in Section 4(b) that was found unconstitutional gives full credence to the Shelby decision and serves to provide guidance to the next court faced with claims emanating from the same “nucleus of operative fact” as this litigation. Should Congress enact a new coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, this dismissal will not preclude Plaintiffs or those in privity with them from bringing a future Section 5 claim predicated on such new coverage formula, even if that claim arises out of the same nucleus of operative facts. Moreover, the proposed dismissal order preserves and clarifies the rights of the Plaintiffs to bring independent claims under Section 2 or Section 3 of the VRA, neither of which is barred by the decision in Shelby. A limited dismissal with prejudice, specifically delineating the claims dismissed with prejudice, would serve the best interests of all parties. A proposed order of dismissal is attached.
(acknowledging serious concerns in applying res judicata to bar claims under the VRA but concluding that “it has little choice but to dismiss the intent claim against Pickens County on the grounds of res judicata.”).
4
US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 5 of 6 PageID 677

Date: July 15, 2013

Respectfully submitted,
/s/_____Robert A. Kengle________ Robert A. Kengle Dara Lindenbaum
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1401 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 40 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 662-8324 bkengle@lawyerscommittee.org dlindenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org
/s/___ _Edward Soto____________ Edward Soto
Edward R. McCarthy Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1200
Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: (305) 577-3100
Fax: (305) 374-7159 Edward.Soto@Weil.com Edward.McCarthy@Weil.com
/s/______Julie A. Ebenstein_______ Julie A. Ebenstein
Randall C. Marshall ACLU Foundation of Florida, Inc.
4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340 Miami, Florida 33137
Telephone: (786) 363-4434 jebenstein@aclufl.org
rmarshall@aclualabama.org
/s/____ ___M. Laughlin McDonald_ M. Laughlin McDonald
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Telephone: (404) 523-2721 lmcdonald@aclu.org

5
US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 56 Filed 07/15/13 Page 6 of 6 PageID 678 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by filing via CM/ECF this 15th day of July, 2013, upon all counsel of record.
/s/ Lauren Z. Alexander Lauren Z. Alexander, Esq.
6
US_ACTIVE:\44294147\1\99995.4408

 
 Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 60 Filed 07/24/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID 691

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

MI FAMILIA VOTA EDUCATION FUND, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

V.

Case No. 8:12-CV-1294-T-27MAP

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State,

Defendant.
----------------------------------'
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Any and All Claims in Plaintiffs'

First Amended Complaint Predicated On the Coverage Formula in Section 4 ofthe Voting Rights

Act Held to be Unconstitutional in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder (Dkt.56) and Defendant's

Response (Dkt. 57). 1 Also before the Court is (unopposed) Defendant's Motion to Dissolve Stay

(Dkt. 58).

The parties agree that the holding in Shelby County warrants dismissal of this action with

prejudice, but disagree on the form of the dismissal order. According to Plaintiffs, their proposed

order "clarifies what claims are being dismissed for the benefit of counsel who are later faced with

the issues raised in this litigation ... and serves to provide guidance to the next court faced with the

claims emanating from the same 'nucleus of operative facts' as this litigation." (Dkt. 56, p. 2,-4).

Defendant is correct that Plaintiffs' proposed order would essentially constitute an impermissible

1 Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 2013 WL 3184629 (June 25, 2013) (slip op.). 1

Case 8:12-cv-01294-JDW-MAP Document 60 Filed 07/24/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID 692
advisory opinion. See Miller v. F. C. C. 66 F.3d 1140, 1145 (11th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 (1996) ("By asking this court to decide what another court should do in a future case, petitioners are posing a hypothetical question, the answer to which would be an advisory opinion.").
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a)(2), this "action may be dismissed at the plaintiff{s'] request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper." On consideration, this action should be dismissed with prejudice, without additional commentary.
Accordingly, 1. Defendant's Motion to Dissolve Stay (Dkt. 58) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
""" DONE AND ORDERED this Z.tf day of July, 2013.

Copies to: Counsel of record

CHARLES R. WILSON United States Circuit Judge
JAMES S. MOODY United States District Judge

2

 
 ACLU
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION of FLORIDA

ACLU
AMERICAN CI VI L LI BERTIES UNION

June 1, 2012
The Honorable Ken Detzner Secretary of State Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Fax: (850) 245-6125 Email: DOS. SecretaryofState@DOS.MyFlorida.com
CC: Dr. Gisela Salas Department of State Division of Elections Director's Office R. A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Fax: (850) 245-6127 Email: DOSGeneralCounsel@dos.state.fl.us
Re: National Voter Registration Act Compliance
Dear Secretary Detzner:
According to multiple media reports and records received pursuant to public records requests, the Division of Elections has, within the past month, distributed lists of over 2,600 registered voters to county supervisors of elections with instructions to begin the removal process for the voters on those lists pursuant to Fl. Stat.§ 98.075. The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the ACLU Foundation of Florida and the ACLU Foundation Voting Rights Project, write on behalf of Mi Familia Vota, Murat Limage, and Pamela Gomez, to notify you that, in distributing said lists for removal purposes under Fl. Stat.§ 98.075, the Division of Elections is in violation of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993,42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg, et seq. (the "NVRA").

The NVRA expressly requires a state to "complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date ·of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters/' 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg~6(c)(2)(A). A primary election is scheduled for August H, 2012, and voters will vqtE; on c.andidates for multiple federal offiCes on that <;l;;xte; Therefore, all 13ystema:tiC list maintenance activity must have been completed by .May 16, 2012. Based on media reports and records received pursuant to open rec;ords requestsi it is our understanding that the Division of Elections has sent removal lists and the county supervisors of elections have been perforll1ip.g list maintenance activities based on such lists past May 16, and have, consequently, violated the NVRA.

Further, Section S(b)(l) of the NVRA provides that any state program or activity
to maintain ah accurate and current voter registration roll shall be "uniform; nondiscdrriinateil'y, and in compliance with the. Voting Rights Act of 1965..." 42 U.S.C. l973gg-6(b)(l).

Under Section 5 oHhe Voting Rights Act, Collier, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough, and Monroe Counties are required to seek preclearance by the Department of Justice or by filing a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Please advise us immediately if the State or ;:1ny of the covered counties has made an administrative submission to the AG. Wewill assume ih the absence of a respbrtsethat no such stibm1ssion has beeh made or is contemplated.

We urge you to take immediate steps to comply with. the NVRAi and would be

pleased to work cooperatively with you to ensure that this is accomplished. However,

if the Division ofElections and the county supervisors ofelections fall to take steps to

remedy violations of the NVRA, we are prepared to initiate litigation. In this regard,

please b~. advised that this letter serves as notice of a vio1ation of the NVRA pursuant to

42 UB;C. § l973gg-9(b), thus allowing us to file suit at the conclusion of the statutory

- c 1 ) 20-day waiting period if the violation has not been fully remedied. ~J'-----··

Ra da11 C. Marshall

~

Juhe A: .Ebenstein

Data 'Lindenbaum

ACLU of Florida Foundation, Inc.

Lawyers' Coin:mi.ttee for Civil Rights

(786) 363-..2.700 RMarshail@aclufl.org

Under Law (202) 662~8324

JEben5tein@atlufl.org

RKengle@lawyerscommittee.org

~--~ l.Qd:,t -~ M~~

DLindenbamn@lawyerscommittee.org

M. LaiighlintdJonald
I<;:ai:ie O'Cqnnor ACLU, Voting Rights Project (404) 523- 2721 LMcDonald@aclu.org·
r<.bConnor@adu.org

 
 Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 1 of 8
U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (Tampa) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 8:12−cv−01294−JDW−MAP

CLOSED

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, et al. v. Detzner Assigned to: Judge James D. Whittemore Referred to: Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo Cause: 42:1973 Voting Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 06/08/2012 Date Terminated: 07/24/2013 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 441 Civil Rights: Voting Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Mi Familia Vota Education Fund as an organization

represented by Dara Lindenbaum Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1401 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 202−662−8324 Email: DLindenbaum@Lawyerscommittee.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Robert McCarthy Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP Suite 1200 1395 Brickell Ave Miami, FL 33131 305/577−3100 Fax: 305/374−7159 Email: edward.mccarthy@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Soto Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP Suite 1200 1395 Brickell Ave Miami, FL 33131 305/577−3177 Fax: 305/374−7159 Email: edward.soto@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Julie A Ebenstein ACLU Foundation of Florida, Inc. Suite 340 4500 Biscayne Blvd Miami, FL 33137 786/363−4434 Email: jebenstein@aclufl.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Katie O'Connor American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, GA 30303 404/523−2721 Email: koconnor@aclu.org TERMINATED: 07/16/2012 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 2 of 8

Plaintiff Murat Limage

M. Laughlin McDonald American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 230 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 1440 Atlanta, GA 30303 Email: lmcdonald@aclu.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Randall C. Marshall ACLU Foundation of Alabama, Inc. PO Box 6179 Montgomery, AL 36106−0179 334/265−2754 Fax: 3342695666 Email: rmarshall@aclualabama.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert Kengle Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1401 New York Avenue NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 202/662−8324 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Dara Lindenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Edward Robert McCarthy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Edward Soto (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Julie A Ebenstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Katie O'Connor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/2012 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
M. Laughlin McDonald (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Randall C. Marshall

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 3 of 8

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert Kengle (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Pamela Gomez

represented by Dara Lindenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Robert McCarthy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Soto (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Julie A Ebenstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Katie O'Connor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/2012 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

M. Laughlin McDonald (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Randall C. Marshall (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert Kengle (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Ken Detzner in his official capacity as Florida Secretary of State

represented by Ashley E. Davis Florida Education Association 213 S Adams St Tallahassee, FL 32301−1720 850−224−0447 Email: ashley.davis@floridaea.org

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 4 of 8

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel Elden Nordby Executive Office of the Govenor Room 209 − The Capitol 400 S Monroe St Tallahassee, FL 32399−1050 850/717−5500 Email: daniel.nordby@eog.myflorida.com TERMINATED: 12/12/2012 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

J. Andrew Atkinson Florida Department of State 500 S Bronough St Ste 100 Tallahassee, FL 32399−0250 850/245−6536 Fax: 850−245−6127 Email: JAndrew.Atkinson@DOS.MyFlorida.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

John M. Gore Jones Day 51 Louisiana Avenue NW Washington, DC 20001 202/879−3939 Email: jmgore@jonesday.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A. Carvin Jones Day 51 Louisiana Avenue NW Washington, DC 20001 202/879−3939 Email: macarvin@jonesday.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Interested Party United States Department of Justice

represented by John A. Russ U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Voting Section, 1800G Washington, DC 20530 202/307−6262 Email: John.Russ@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jenigh J. Garrett United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Room 7205 NWB Washington, DC 20530 Email: jenigh.garrett@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed # Docket Text

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 5 of 8

06/08/2012
06/08/2012 06/13/2012 06/22/2012 06/22/2012 06/22/2012 06/22/2012 06/25/2012
06/25/2012
06/25/2012
06/25/2012
06/27/2012 06/27/2012 07/02/2012 07/12/2012 07/12/2012 07/13/2012 07/13/2012 07/13/2012 07/13/2012

1 COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE PANEL against Ken Detzner (Filing fee $ 350 receipt number TPA11654) filed by Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(SAH) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
2 Summons issued as to Ken Detzner. (SAH) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
3 NOTICE of designation under Local Rule 3.05 − track 2 (AO) (Entered: 06/13/2012)
4 MOTION for Katherine O'Connor to appear pro hac vice by All Plaintiffs. (Ebenstein, Julie) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
5 MOTION for M Laughlin McDonald to appear pro hac vice by All Plaintiffs. (Ebenstein, Julie) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
6 MOTION for Robert Kengle to appear pro hac vice by All Plaintiffs. (Ebenstein, Julie) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
7 MOTION to extend time to Seek Pro Hac Vice Admission by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (McCarthy, Edward) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney Dara Lindenbaum appearing on behalf of Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA11862.) (JNB) (Entered: 06/26/2012)
***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney Robert Kengle appearing on behalf of Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA11862.) (JNB) (Entered: 06/26/2012)
***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney M. Laughlin McDonald appearing on behalf of Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA11863.) (JNB) (Entered: 06/26/2012)
***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney Katherine O'Connor appearing on behalf of Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA11863.) (JNB) (Entered: 06/26/2012)
8 ENDORSED ORDER granting 7 Motion to extend time to seek pro hac vice admission. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 6/27/2012. (KE) (Entered: 06/27/2012)
9 RETURN of service executed on 6/15/12 by Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage as to Ken Detzner. (McCarthy, Edward) (Entered: 06/27/2012)
10 ORDER granting 4 motion to appear pro hac vice; granting 5 motion to appear pro hac vice; granting 6 motion to appear pro hac vice. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/2/2012. (KE) (Entered: 07/02/2012)
11 NOTIFICATION OF REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE COURT. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/11/2012. (KE) (Entered: 07/12/2012)
12 MOTION for Katie O'Connor to withdraw as attorney by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (O'Connor, Katie) (Entered: 07/12/2012)
13 MOTION for Michael Carvin to appear pro hac vice by Ken Detzner. (Nordby, Daniel) (Entered: 07/13/2012)
14 MOTION for John Gore to appear pro hac vice by Ken Detzner. (Nordby, Daniel) (Entered: 07/13/2012)
15 ORDER granting 12 Motion for Katie O'Connor, Esq. to withdraw as attorney. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/13/2012. (AO) (Entered: 07/13/2012)
16 MOTION to dismiss Complaint by Ken Detzner. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(Nordby, Daniel) (Entered: 07/13/2012)

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 6 of 8

07/16/2012 07/16/2012 07/20/2012 07/24/2012 07/24/2012 07/27/2012
07/27/2012 07/27/2012
07/30/2012 07/30/2012
08/20/2012 09/04/2012 09/04/2012 09/07/2012 09/11/2012 09/12/2012
09/13/2012

***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney John M. Gore appearing on behalf of Ken Detzner (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA12264.) (JNB) (Entered: 07/17/2012)
***PRO HAC VICE FEES paid and Special Admission Attorney Certification Form filed by attorney Michael A. Carvin appearing on behalf of Ken Detzner (Filing fee $10 receipt number TPA12264.) (JNB) (Entered: 07/17/2012)
17 MOTION for Dara Lindenbaum to appear pro hac vice by All Plaintiffs. (Ebenstein, Julie) (Entered: 07/20/2012)
18 ORDER granting 17 motion to appear pro hac vice. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/24/2012. (KE) (Entered: 07/24/2012)
19 ORDER granting 13 motion to appear pro hac vice; granting 14 motion to appear pro hac vice. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/24/2012. (KE) (Entered: 07/24/2012)
20 AMENDED COMPLAINT First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Request for Three Judge Panel against Ken Detzner filed by Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − May 31, 2012 Letter)(Soto, Edward) (Entered: 07/27/2012)
21 NOTICE of Filing First Amended Complaint by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund re 20 Amended complaint (Soto, Edward) Modified on 7/30/2012 (BES). (Entered: 07/27/2012)
22 NOTICE of filing Statement of Interest by United States Department of Justice (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1a, # 2 Exhibit 1b, # 3 Exhibit 1c, # 4 Exhibit 1d, # 5 Exhibit 2a, # 6 Exhibit 2b, # 7 Exhibit 2c, # 8 Exhibit 2d, # 9 Exhibit 3, # 10 Exhibit 4, # 11 Exhibit 5, # 12 Exhibit 6, # 13 Exhibit 7, # 14 Exhibit 8, # 15 Exhibit 9, # 16 Exhibit 10)(Russ, John) Modified on 7/30/2012 (BES). (Entered: 07/27/2012)
23 ENDORSED ORDER denying as moot 16 Motion to Dismiss based on the filing of an Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/30/2012. (KE) (Entered: 07/30/2012)
24 DESIGNATION OF THREE−JUDGE COURT ORDER designating Circuit Judge Charles R. Wilson and District Judge James S. Moody to serve with District Judge James D. Whittemore. Signed by Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina, U.S. Court of Appeals on 7/17/2012. (JNB) (Entered: 07/30/2012)
25 MOTION to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint by Ken Detzner. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5)(Carvin, Michael) (Entered: 08/20/2012)
26 NOTICE of Supplemental Statement of Interest by United States Department of Justice re 25 MOTION to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint (Garrett, Jenigh) Modified on 9/5/2012 (BES). (Entered: 09/04/2012)
27 RESPONSE in opposition re 25 MOTION to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint filed by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (Soto, Edward) (Entered: 09/04/2012)
28 NOTICE of Appearance by Ashley E. Davis on behalf of Ken Detzner (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 09/07/2012)
29 MOTION for leave to file Reply In Support Of Motion To Dismiss First Amended Complaint by Ken Detzner. (Attachments: # 1 Reply)(Carvin, Michael) (Entered: 09/11/2012)
30 ENDORSED ORDER granting The Secretary's Motion for Leave to File Reply (Dkt. 29. The Clerk is directed to separately docket the Reply attached to the motion. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 9/12/2012. (Whittemore, James) (Entered: 09/12/2012)
31 REPLY to response to motion re 25 MOTION to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint filed by Ken Detzner. (BES) (Entered: 09/13/2012)

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 7 of 8

09/18/2012 10/02/2012 10/22/2012 10/22/2012
10/23/2012 10/29/2012
10/30/2012 12/10/2012 12/11/2012 12/17/2012 12/17/2012 12/18/2012 01/25/2013 02/06/2013
02/11/2013 03/01/2013
03/13/2013 06/25/2013 06/26/2013 06/27/2013 07/01/2013 07/09/2013

32 ORDER denying 25 Secretary's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 9/18/2012. (KE) (Entered: 09/18/2012)
33 ANSWER and affirmative defenses to 20 Amended complaint by Ken Detzner.(Carvin, Michael) (Entered: 10/02/2012)
34 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 10/22/2012. (KE) (Entered: 10/22/2012)
35 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 34 Order to show cause filed by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (Soto, Edward) (Entered: 10/22/2012)
36 CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT. (Soto, Edward) (Entered: 10/23/2012)
37 CASE MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 3/11/2013, Dispositive motions due by 4/12/2013, Pretrial Conference set for 7/12/2013 at 10:00 AM in Tampa Courtroom 13B before Judge James D. Whittemore, Non−Jury Trial set for August 2013 trial term which commences 8/5/2013. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 10/29/2012. (KE) (Entered: 10/29/2012)
38 ORDER discharging 34 Order to show cause. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 10/29/2012. (KE) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
39 Unopposed MOTION for to withdraw as attorney by Ken Detzner. (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 12/10/2012)
40 ORDER granting 39 Motion to withdraw as attorney. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 12/11/2012. (KE) (Entered: 12/11/2012)
41 Unopposed MOTION to stay by Ken Detzner. (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 12/17/2012)
42 ORDER granting 41 Unopposed Motion to Stay Proceedings. [SEE ORDER]. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 12/17/2012. (AO) (Entered: 12/17/2012)
Case stayed (BES) (Entered: 12/18/2012)
43 MOTION to stay pending decision in Shelby County by Ken Detzner. (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 01/25/2013)
44 RESPONSE in Opposition re 43 MOTION to stay pending decision in Shelby County filed by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (Soto, Edward) (Entered: 02/06/2013)
45 ORDER granting in part 43 motion to stay. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 2/8/2013. (KE) (Entered: 02/11/2013)
46 Joint MOTION for protective order by Ken Detzner, Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Stipulated Protective Order Governing Confidential Information and Documents)(Soto, Edward) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo. (Entered: 03/01/2013)
47 ORDER granting 46 Joint Motion for Protective Order. See order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo on 3/13/2013. (ACS) (Entered: 03/13/2013)
48 NOTICE of decision in Shelby County v. Holder by Ken Detzner (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Shelby County v. Holder)(Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 06/25/2013)
49 ORDER directing compliance with Court's 2/8/12 Order. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 6/26/2013. (KE) (Entered: 06/26/2013)
50 AMENDED ORDER amending 49 Order directing compliance with court order. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 6/27/2013. (KE) (Entered: 06/27/2013)
51 NOTICE of Appearance by John Andrew Atkinson on behalf of Ken Detzner (Atkinson, John) (Entered: 07/01/2013)
52 NOTICE of hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 7/11/2013 at 04:30 PM in Tampa Courtroom 13 B before Judge James D. Whittemore. On the date/time specified, counsel shall call 1−888−684−8852; enter access code 7302428; and the

Case: 8:12-cv-1294 As of: 02/26/2018 12:03 PM EST 8 of 8

07/10/2013 07/11/2013 07/11/2013 07/15/2013 07/19/2013 07/19/2013 07/22/2013 07/24/2013

security code 1294 (4 digit case number) followed by the # (pound) sign.(AO) (Entered: 07/09/2013)
53 NOTICE of Proposed Order of Dismissal with Prejudice by Ken Detzner re 50 Amended Order (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 07/10/2013)
54 NOTICE of Proposed Order of Dismissal With Prejudice Only to Extent the Section 5 is Predicated on the Current Section 4 Coverage Formula by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Soto, Edward) (Entered: 07/11/2013)
55 Minute Entry. Proceedings held before Judge James D. Whittemore: TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE held on 7/11/2013. Court Reporter: Linda Starr (AO) (Entered: 07/12/2013)
56 MOTION to Dismiss Any and All Claims in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint Predicated on the Coverage Formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act Held to Be Unconstitutional in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Soto, Edward) (Entered: 07/15/2013)
57 RESPONSE to Motion re 56 MOTION to Dismiss Any and All Claims in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint Predicated on the Coverage Formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act Held to Be Unconstitutional in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder filed by Ken Detzner. (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 07/19/2013)
58 MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically to dissolve stay by Ken Detzner. (Davis, Ashley) (Entered: 07/19/2013)
59 RESPONSE to Motion re 58 MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically to dissolve stay filed by Pamela Gomez, Murat Limage, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund. (Soto, Edward) (Entered: 07/22/2013)
60 ORDER granting in part 56 motion to dismiss; granting 58 Motion to Dissolve Stay. The clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 7/24/2013. (KE) (Entered: 07/24/2013)