Government

Florida House Forwards Dramatic Supreme Court Reform

House backs it on 79-38 party-lines vote, but bill's fate uncertain in Senate
By: Kevin Derby | Posted: April 16, 2011 3:55 AM

House Speaker Dean CannonHouse Speaker Dean Cannon | Credit: myfloridahouse.gov - Meredith Geddings
After two hours of contentious debate, the Florida House voted on Friday to approve forwarding a proposed constitutional amendment to the voters. The proposal passed on a vote that mirrored party lines, with 79 Republicans backing the controversial measure and 38 Democrats voting against it.

When he took the gavel after the November elections, Speaker Dean Cannon, R-Winter Park, called for judicial reform. Before the session started, he said he wanted to see the creation of two separate courts, one to focus on criminal justice matters, the other would handle civil matters. The proposed amendment would increase the number of judges from seven to 10, with five on each of the proposed branches.

If the Legislature passes the proposal, a constitutional amendment would make its way to the ballot in November 2012, when it would need 60 percent support to pass. Critics have maintained that Cannon was looking to get back at the state Supreme Court for shooting down a number of proposed amendments backed by the Republicans in 2010, including a redistricting measure against those backed by FairDistricts Florida and one allowing Floridians to opt out of the federal health-care law.

Democrats started the debate by attacking the proposal, which had the support of Rep. Eric Eisnaugle, R-Orlando, arguing that the Republicans were looking to pack the court. They invoked the same phrases that opponents labeled Franklin D. Roosevelt’s attempt to reform the Supreme Court of the United States after the 1936 presidential election.

“This is a very important bill,” said Rep. Jim Waldman, D-Coconut Creek, who attacked the proposal. “It is neither bold nor innovative nor well-conceived,” he added, referring to the measure as an attempt to “pack the court.”

“It is an assault on our Constitution,” insisted Waldman, who added that it was an overreach from Republicans looking to control all branches of government.

“We do not have the critical support of the institution we’re looking to make changes to,” argued Rep. Darryl Rouson, D-St. Petersburg.

While Waldman acted, as he has throughout the session, as the floor leader of the Democrats during the debate, Rep. Will Snyder of Stuart, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, led Republicans who argued that the measure would help add checks and balances and restore the balance of power.

Despite being stripped earlier in the week of his position as deputy majority whip by breaking with the Republican majority looking to defund cancer research to pay for Medicaid, Rep. James Grant, R-Tampa, kicked off the debate for the Republicans.

“This is not a bill I take lightly.” said Grant, who maintained that the proposed reform would increase the efficiency and promptness of the court system. “The status quo is unacceptable.

“I believe in fundamental rights,” added Grant. “This bill is about fundamental rights, nothing else.”

“We need to create a stronger check for the judicial branch,” argued Rep. Greg Steube, R-Sarasota, who accused the state Supreme Court of overreaching its own power. “It is necessary for us to rein in the balance of power and the power of the court.”

Freshman Rep. Richard Corcoran, R-New Port Richey, said that the proposed amendment would speed up the process for executing inmates on death row. “I want to stick it to death-row inmates,” said Corcoran.


Comments (6)

Clark05
6:45AM OCT 4TH 2011
RepublicanConscience
6:39AM APR 16TH 2011
It is a time to end the judicial legislation. This is a measure that if the Judicial branch had not overstepped their authority would not be an issue. It seems to me that in most State Supreme Courts, don't use precedent and the rule of law and the Constitution in their decisions but lean more to the provocative rule of "Because I Said So." That is an impeachable offense. If we can make the impeachment process, simpler and swifter, we can overrule those decisions by negating the impeached vote. Watch those black robed thugs follow the law. Right now they should wear matching black hoods with eye cutouts because their decisions are an embarrassment.
Kym Elder
9:13PM APR 16TH 2011
Do you even know what separation of powers means??? How far must we go to throw out every protection we have in this country because people don't recognize fascism when it is staring them in the face? The thugs are actually the Republican governor and his legislative henchmen. Benjamin Franklin said that the founding fathers had created a democratic republic ...if we can keep it. I am afraid we are on the verse of losing every freedom we have under the guise of keeping taxes low and less government. It is a sham by the rich and powerful on the lower and middle class. An argument by a few power hungry, self-centered hypocrites to put blinders on what is really happening in this country. Dividing the Florida Supreme Court in two? This is the most ludicrous issue I have seen in forever. The reasoning behind it can only be to unbalance the balance of power in favor of the legislature. You need to open your history book and READ.
Kym Elder
9:11PM APR 16TH 2011
Do you even know what separation of powers means??? How far must we go to throw out every protection we have in this country because people don't recognize fascism when it is staring them in the face? The thugs are actually the Republican governor and his legislative henchmen. Benjamin Franklin said that the founding fathers had created a democratic republic ...if we can keep it. I am afraid we are on the verse of losing every freedom we have under the guise of keeping taxes low and less government. It is a sham by the rich and powerful on the lower and middle class. An argument by a few power hungry, self-centered hypocrites to put blinders on what is really happening in this country. Dividing the Florida Supreme Court in two? This is the most ludicrous issue I have seen in forever. The reasoning behind it can only be to unbalance the balance of power in favor of the legislature. You need to open your history book and READ.
Repubtallygirl
10:09AM APR 18TH 2011
It has been working great in Texas for the last 135 years and they don't have inmates sitting on death row for 20 plus years.

The voters will decide this one, it will be up to 60 plus one percent, and that is fascism? Your argument reminds of the saying, 'better to be thought a fool and be thought of as an idiot versus opening your mouth and removing all doubt."
jas
11:11AM APR 16TH 2011
Shame this bill will do nothing to address your concerns. In fact this proposal will make it worse!