Florida’s 1951 law requiring members of the governor’s political party to appear first for each office listed on general election ballots remains in force as a result of a federal appeals court decision this past week.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled that plaintiffs in the case brought against Florida Secretary of State Laurel Lee – Democratic voters and organizations – lacked standing to file suit against the secretary.
“None of them proved an injury in fact,” Justice William Pryor’s April 29 decision states. “And any injury they might suffer is neither fairly traceable to the secretary nor redressable by a judgment against her because she does not enforce the challenged law.”
Instead, county election supervisors have the job of placing candidates on the ballots in a way that adheres to the law. Since Gov. Ron DeSantis is a Republican, GOP candidates will be listed ahead of their opponents in the ballot lineup in November.
The 11th Circuit decision vacated a federal district court’s ruling that sided with the plaintiffs and found that the 1951 law was unconstitutional. The district court proceedings included testimony from an expert that candidates who are listed first on a ballot have an advantage amounting to about 5 percentage points.
That the 11th Circuit did not rule directly on the validity of the nearly 70-year-old law was disappointing to some in the legal field.
“More and more we are seeing the courts avoiding substantive decisions based upon the putative lack of standing of the individuals bringing the cases,” one attorney told the Florida Record. “It is a distressing trend.”
Florida election officials have argued that the state’s candidate order requirements let voters find their preferred candidate more quickly and lead to a more uniform process for ballot layout and election administration.
Marc Elias, an attorney representing the Florida Democratic Party in this case, said in a prepared statement that he disagrees with the court’s opinion that Democrats lack standing.
“It is important to note that the court did not dispute that Republicans are given an unfair advantage due to ballot order,” Elias said. “Arguing that Democrats are not harmed by an illegal and unwarranted 5 percent Republican advantage in every single election in the state is wrong, inconsistent with running a fair election, and we are considering all of our options in this case.”