On October 18, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle issued a 55-page ruling in Jones v DeSantis, n.d., 4:19cv-300. This is a case filed in June 2019 over the confusing new Florida state constitutional provision that says ex-felons may register to vote if they have “completed all terms of sentencing.” The legislature this year passed HB 7066, which says “all terms of sentencing” means ex-felons must have paid all fines, orders for restitution, court fees, and civil liens.
The plaintiffs are ten ex-felons who cannot afford to pay these various amounts, but who would still like to register to vote. The order says that individuals who cannot afford to pay any of these amounts cannot be denied the right to register. It orders the state to create a procedure by which individuals can apply to register based on their own evidence that they cannot afford the amounts. The ten particular plaintiffs will also now be allowed to register.
What is the MAGIC afford // can NOT afford amount per day / week / month / year / lifetime ???
AND… what about restoration of their 2nd Amendment rights?
In November 2018 the voters of Florida passed a state constitutional amendment restoring voting rights for ex-felons, with unclear conditions. The Florida law concerning guns for ex-felons was not part of that initiative, so has nothing to do with this lawsuit.
2 Amdt rights if NOT under *lawful* arrest.
Being in jail is being under arrest – lawful or unlawful.
Habeas Corpus – judicial hearing about probable cause for arrest — MAJOR power struggle in 1600s in England to finally have the process — BASIC *liberty* item.
Still fatal crime loophole in 14-2 about right to vote — in or out of jail.
Many blacks set up and convicted of crimes in ex-slave States
— thus NEW AGE stuff like the FL Const Amdt. required.
MORONS writing New Age Const Amdts — with vague/unknown meanings.