Connect with us

Politics

Senate passes repeal of ‘clean hands’ rule for exonerees

Published

on


After years of failed attempts, it took Senators mere minutes to pass a monumental bill to repeal a unique restriction that today blocks some exonerees from receiving just compensation for time wrongly spent in prison.

Senators voted 38-0 to pass SB 130 to repeal Florida’s “clean hands” rule, which bars exonerees with more than one nonviolent felony from being eligible for recompense without legislative action.

The measure’s sponsor, Fleming Island Republican Sen. Jennifer Bradley, noted that since state lawmakers created a route for exonerees to be compensated, just five have received it. Eighteen have been denied, totaling more than 300 years of lost liberty.

Six have waited for a decade or more.

“Each of us has an incredible honor to be able to represent our constituents, and part of that privilege … is the duty that comes with that to be able to right wrongs,” she said.

Bradley credited her husband, former Sen. Rob Bradley, and former Sen. Arthena Joyner for working on earlier versions of her legislation.

“The posture it’s in today (because of their efforts) is the right and just thing for a state to do (after taking) people’s liberty,” she said. “This bill rights that wrong.”

St. Augustine Democratic Sen. Darryl Rouson noted that he was first elected to the Legislature in 2008, when state lawmakers enacted the “Victims of Wrongful Incarceration Compensation Act” to pay exonerees for their lost time.

The bill included the “clean hands” proviso and priced each wrongly incarcerated year at $50,000. That rate remains the same today, 17 years later.

SB 130 and its lower-chamber twin (HB 59) by Tampa Republican Rep. Traci Koster, which now awaits a House floor vote, would also lengthen the window for exonerees to file for compensation to two years after an order vacating their conviction, up from today’s time frame of just 90 days.

Since 1989, 91 people in Florida prisoners have had their convictions overturned, according to the National Registry of Exonerations. Of them, just five received a settlement from the state since 2008, when lawmakers enacted Florida’s compensation statute.

Representatives for the Innocence Project of Florida, Americans for Prosperity, Florida Association of Defense Attorneys and the Alliance for Safety and Justice have signaled support for the change.

Koster said state staff estimated that passing the legislation will cost Florida $15 million if all exonerees eligible for compensation receive it.

One of them is Sidney Holmes, who spent 34 years behind bars for a crime Broward State Attorney Harold Pryor determined he didn’t commit. Claims legislation filed this Session by Miami Gardens Democratic Sen. Shevrin Jones, Jacksonville Democratic Rep. Kimberly Daniels and Davie Democratic Rep. Mike Gottlieb would clear $1.7 million to Holmes.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Auburn Tigers take on the Florida Gators in Final 4

Published

on


The game is tonight.

Florida Gators (34-4, 17-4 SEC) vs. Auburn Tigers (32-5, 16-4 SEC)

San Antonio; Saturday, 6:09 p.m. EDT

BETMGM SPORTSBOOK LINE: Gators -2.5; over/under is 159.5

BOTTOM LINE: No. 4 Auburn and No. 3 Florida meet in the NCAA Tournament Final Four.

The Tigers’ record in SEC play is 16-4, and their record is 16-1 against non-conference opponents. Auburn scores 83.2 points while outscoring opponents by 14.0 points per game.

The Gators’ record in SEC action is 17-4. Florida has a 2-1 record in games decided by 3 points or fewer.

Auburn averages 9.1 made 3-pointers per game, 2.4 more made shots than the 6.7 per game Florida gives up. Florida has shot at a 47.3% rate from the field this season, 6.7 percentage points above the 40.6% shooting opponents of Auburn have averaged.

The teams meet for the second time this season. The Gators won 90-81 in the last matchup on Feb. 8.

___

Republished with permission of the Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Donald Trump makes big bet on tariffs

Published

on


Not even 24 hours after his party lost a key Wisconsin race and underperformed in Florida, President Donald Trump followed the playbook that has defined his political career: He doubled down.

Trump’s move on Wednesday to place stiff new tariffs on imports from nearly all U.S. trading partners marks an all-in bet by the Republican that his once-fringe economic vision will pay off for Americans. It was the realization of his four decades of advocacy for a protectionist foreign policy and the belief that free trade was forcing the United States into decline as its economy shifted from manufacturing to services.

The tariff announcement was the latest and perhaps boldest manifestation of Trump’s second-term freedom to lead with his instincts after feeling his first turn in the Oval Office was restrained by aides who did not share his worldview. How it shakes out will be a defining judgment on his presidency.

The early reviews have been worrisome.

Financial markets had their worst week since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, foreign trade partners retaliated and economists warned that the import taxes may boost inflation and potentially send the U.S. into a recession. It’s now Republican lawmakers who are fretting about their party’s future while Democrats feel newly buoyant over what they see as Trump’s overreach.

He has promised that the taxes on imports will bring about a domestic manufacturing renaissance and help fund an extension of his 2017 tax cuts. He insisted on Thursday as the Dow Jones fell by 1,600 points that things were “going very well” and the economy would “boom,” then spent Friday at the golf course as the index plunged 2,200 more points.

In his first term, Trump’s tariff threats brought world leaders to his door to cut deals. This time, his actions so far have led to steep retaliation from China and promises from European allies to push back.

As Trump struggles with the economy, Democrats are beginning to emerge from the cloud of doom that has consumed their party ever since their election drubbing in November.

They scored a decisive victory in Wisconsin’s high-profile state Supreme Court election on Tuesday, even after Elon Musk and his affiliated groups poured more than $20 million into the contest. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker then breathed new life into the Democratic resistance by delivering a record 25-hour-long speech on the Senate floor that centered on a call for his party to find its resolve.

___

Republished with permission of the Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

State can enforce DEI general education course ban while litigation plays out

Published

on


The state of Florida may enforce a law eliminating general education courses that teach “identity politics” at Florida’s institutions of higher education pending resolution of a lawsuit filed by professors, a federal judge has ruled.

In January, the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida filed suit on the professors’ behalf alleging that SB 266, a 2023 law limiting general education course classifications and funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, harmed the professors’ academic ambitions. General education courses are required for students to graduate.

Days after a preliminary injunction hearing in Tallahassee in front of U.S. District Chief Judge Mark Walker, he ruled Wednesday that the professors had not established they would suffer any harm.

“This ruling is disappointing, but also offers a clearer path forward to prove this law is unconstitutional,” said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida in a news release. “The law is a blatant effort to control the content of higher education, muzzle Florida’s scholars, and erase perspectives the state finds politically inconvenient. We remain committed to fighting alongside faculty, students, and the broader academic community until this undemocratic law is struck down.”

Among the plaintiffs is University of Florida political science professor Sharon Austin, who complains she was denied funding to present at a 2024 conference hosted by Diversity Abroad, which the school had paid for her to present at in 2023. The school specifically cited SB 266 in refusing to pay for her to appear subsequently, the suit alleges.

“As for Plaintiff Austin, her declaration demonstrates that she has already suffered a denial of state funding to attend conferences in 2024. However, to obtain prospective relief, she must demonstrate an unambiguous intention to seek funding to attend conferences at a reasonably foreseeable time in the future. That she has not done,” Walker wrote.

Professors who have had their courses removed from general education requirements, or fear it may happen, say their injury is chilled speech and potential repercussions in post-tenure review.

“To the extent these Plaintiffs claim their classroom speech associated with courses for which they have no stated plans to teach at a reasonably foreseeable time in the future will be chilled, such a hypothetical future chill is both too remote and speculative to amount to a cognizable injury in fact,” Walker wrote.

ACLU will continue
The plaintiffs allege viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment; that the law is over-broad; and that it violates Florida’s Campus Free Expression Act.

State University System Chancellor Ray Rodrigues said in January that the law has helped address a Gallup poll that found “political agendas” as Americans’ Number One reason they have lost confidence in higher education.

Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr. said the law helps students who can be “overwhelmed by the number of courses that are out there,” and that students can take whatever classes they wish, “but the easier we can make it for them when it comes to general education and making sure that they’re getting what they need there I think is very important.”

Walker did not rule on merits of the underlying case and the ACLU said it will continue its challenge.

“Plaintiffs’ evidence does not demonstrate that any Plaintiff faces an imminent injury — namely, chilled speech — that is traceable to any Defendant’s enforcement of the general education requirements,” Walker wrote.

“For what it’s worth, Plaintiffs’ existential concerns about the survival of their academic departments and the future viability of their areas of expertise in the state of Florida are certainly understandable. However, these concerns, as described at length in Plaintiffs’ declarations, do not give rise to a concrete, imminent, and non-speculative injury in fact sufficient to permit Plaintiffs to seek a preliminary injunction against Defendants’ enforcement of the general education requirements.”

___

Jay Waagmeester reporting. Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: [email protected]


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.