Page 1 of 3

Case No. 1:20cv67-RH-GRJ

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

ACACIA WILLIAMS, DREAM DEFENDERS, 

NEW FLORIDA MAJORITY,

ORGANIZE FLORIDA, TERRIAYNA SPILLMAN,

RAY WINTERS, KATHLEEN WINTERS,

and BIANCA MARIA BAEZ

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO. 1:20cv67-RH-GRJ

RON DESANTIS, in his official capacity

as Governor of the State of Florida,

LAUREL M. LEE, in her official capacity as

Florida Secretary of State, and FLORIDA

ELECTIONS CANVASSING COMMISSION,

Defendants.

___________________________________________________/

ORDER DENYING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

The Florida presidential primary has been in progress through voting by mail 

and early in-person voting and is concluding with in-person voting today, Tuesday, 

March 17, 2020. At 9:29 p.m. on Monday, March 16, the plaintiffs filed this 

lawsuit seeking a fundamental alteration in the manner in which further voting will 

be conducted. At 11:16 p.m., the plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order 

Case 1:20-cv-00067-RH-GRJ Document 12 Filed 03/17/20 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Case No. 1:20cv67-RH-GRJ

or preliminary injunction. The defendants have entered appearances but, not 

surprisingly, have not yet responded to the complaint or motion.

The factual basis for the lawsuit and motion is substantial: the ongoing 

covid-19 national healthcare emergency. Going to the polls may risk infection of 

individual poll workers and voters and thus may advance the spread of the disease, 

increasing the already-substantial risk that the nation’s healthcare capacity will 

eventually be overrun. Responsible supervisors of elections can take steps to 

reduce but not eliminate the risk. 

Some voters are at greater risk than others. And the steps that responsible 

individuals have already taken to reduce the risk of spreading the virus—for 

example, by leaving college campuses—will make it difficult or impossible for 

some to vote.

As a prerequisite to a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, 

a plaintiff must establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, that the 

plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury if the injunction does not issue, 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., Charles H. Wesley Educ. Found., Inc. v. Cox, 408 F.3d 1349, 1354 (11th Cir. 

2005); Siegel v. LePore, 234 F.3d 1163, 1176 (11th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 

Case 1:20-cv-00067-RH-GRJ Document 12 Filed 03/17/20 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case No. 1:20cv67-RH-GRJ

At this hour, with voting in progress, a temporary restraining order would be 

adverse to the public interest. At least until the polls close, and under all the 

circumstances, it will be in the public interest to allow the Governor, Secretary of 

State, and Supervisors of Elections to perform their respective roles. The national 

healthcare emergency is not a basis to cancel an election, and the plaintiffs do not 

assert it is. 

This order makes no ruling on the merits. The order also makes no ruling on 

whether the plaintiffs’ claims will become moot when the polls close or will 

instead either support a claim for relief affecting this primary or be capable of 

repetition yet evading review. A separate order will be entered setting procedures 

going forward.

IT IS ORDERED:

The motion for a temporary restraining order is denied. The motion for a 

preliminary injunction remains pending and will be addressed through further 

procedures after the polls close. 

SO ORDERED on March 17, 2020.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00067-RH-GRJ Document 12 Filed 03/17/20 Page 3 of 3