A Washington Post lawsuit to force the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to comply with a series of public document requests has evolved into an effort to overturn a newly passed law banning the release of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ travel records.
The Post filed its initial complaint in the Second Judicial Circuit in Leon County on July 17. The complaint alleged that the department had engaged in ongoing and unjustified delays in releasing public records requested by newspaper employees and urged the court to compel the release of the documents.
In motions filed at the end of October, the plaintiff’s attorneys seemed to raise the stakes and took aim at Senate Bill 1616, which became law May 11. That bill proclaimed records relating to security or transportation services provided to the governor and his family members were exempt from the state’s public records law.
A notice submitted to the court by Post attorney Charles Tobin argued the new law – Section 943.68(10)(a) of the Florida Statutes – was enacted in violation of the provisions of the Florida Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional. The plaintiff’s motion calling on the defendant to produce the disputed public records will be heard by Judge Angela Dempsey on Jan. 10.
Though the Florida First Amendment Foundation is not a party to this litigation, the lawsuit does dovetail with the foundation’s efforts to make Florida’s government more transparent.
“A wholesale exemption of all these (travel) records was not required,” Bobby Block, the foundation’s executive director, told the Florida Record. He added that while proponents of the new exemption argue that measure is needed to protect the governor’s security, the travel records could be redacted to provide only specifics such as trip costs and destinations.
“These records have shown in prior times abuses by state officials,” Block said, though he acknowledged it’s not currently known if the travel records would reveal whether DeSantis’ travel funds were all spent on state-related business or whether they veered into the area of personal interest or to benefit his presidential campaign.
The current economic state of local and statewide newspapers precludes those media outlets from funding a constitutional challenge to the new exemption, since those outlets lack the resources to do so, he said.
“The Washington Post stepped into the breach,” Block said.
It’s possible that the First Amendment Foundation could get involved in the litigation in a future appeal stage, which allows the filing of amicus briefs, he said.
“This is in our opinion a flagrant disregard for Floridians’ constitutional rights to access government information, but it also represents an extreme abuse of power by the governor and the one-party Legislature," Block said.
Often, state agencies treat public records requests not as constitutional requirements but as favors they sometimes do for the public, he said.
The Oct. 27 motion for the release of the records and for the possible recovery of attorney fees says the Department of Law Enforcement cannot legally invoke Section 943.68(10)(a) to justify the nondisclosure of DeSantis’ air travel records and other information.
“The Legislature enacted that exemption without adhering to the ‘exacting constitutional standard’ the Florida Constitution imposes on legislative attempts to restrict the right of access to public records,” the motion says. “... In particular, the exemption violates the Florida Constitution as it is far ‘broader than necessary’ to serve lawmakers’ stated ‘public necessity’ for it and is thus invalid.”