Florida Direct Democracy Restrictions Challenge

A pro-voting lawsuit challenging the Florida Republican legislature’s efforts to curtail direct democracy. 

Background

Florida Decides Healthcare and voters are suing the state over a recent law that makes it harder to participate in the  ballot initiative process. House Bill 1205 (H.B. 1205) requires petition circulators to be Florida residents and U.S. citizens, requires petition circulators to re-register with the state under stricter requirements  and shortens the petition delivery period to 10 days. The plaintiffs argue the law subjects people to steep fines and criminal penalties in violation of the First and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They seek a court order blocking enforcement of the law.

Why It Matters

Floridians have used the ballot initiative process to pass popular reforms despite opposition from state leadership, including authorizing the use of medical marijuana, restoring voting rights to formerly incarcerated people, and raising the minimum wage. HB 1205 is the latest example of the Republican legislature’s efforts to curtail direct democracy.

Latest Updates

• Jan. 26, 2026: Trial is scheduled to begin.
• Nov. 5, 2025: The district court denied Florida’s motions for summary judgment.
• Oct. 14, 2025: Poder Latinx voluntarily dismissed all of their claims without prejudice.
• Sept. 10, 2025: The district court granted in part and denied in part defendant’s motion to dismiss Poder Latinx’s complaint.
• Sept. 9, 2025: The 11th Circuit paused the district court’s July 8 and Aug. 21 preliminary injunctions pending appeal.
• Sept. 4, 2025: The court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss Smart & Safe’s amended complaint.
• Aug. 21, 2025: The court granted Smart & Safe’s motion, and granted Poder Latinx’s motion in part. This means that 1) The state is blocked from enforcing the residency requirement against Smart & Safe and non-residents who gather signed petitions on Smart & Safe’s behalf; and 2) The state is blocked from enforcing the citizenship requirement against Poder Latinx and Poder Latinx’s non-citizen members who gather signed initiative petitions.
• Aug. 12, 2025: Preliminary injunction hearing scheduled. The Secretary and Attorney General also filed motions to dismiss the complaints brought by FDH, LWVFL, RTCW, Smart & Safe, and Poder Latinx.
• Aug. 11, 2025: FDH filed its third preliminary injunction motion.
• Aug. 4, 2025: LULAC filed notice of cross-appeal.
• Aug. 1, 2025: LWVFL filed notice of cross-appeal.
• July 25, 2025: FDH and RTCW filed notices of cross-appeals.
• July 14, 2025: The FL Secretary of State and Attorney General requested that the 11th Circuit pause the district court’s preliminary injunction ruling pending appeal.
• July 11, 2025: The Secretary of State and Attorney General filed a notice of appeal to the 11th Circuit. They are appealing the district court’s order on the motions for preliminary injunction issued on July 8, 2025.
• July 8, 2025: The court ruled on four motions for preliminary injunction. The court: 1) prohibited the state from enforcing the nonresident ban against plaintiffs sponsoring ballot initiatives (Smart & Safe, FDH, and Right to Clean Water) and against plaintiffs whose members circulate petitions (League of Women Voters FL and LULAC); 2) prohibited the state from enforcing the noncitizen ban against Right to Clean Water’s ballot initiative and the League of Women Voters’ and LULAC’s non-citizen members; and 3) prohibited the state from enforcing the civil and criminal penalties to enforce the prohibition on non-residents and non-citizens collecting signed petitions as it pertains to FDH, Right to Clean Water, the League of Women Voters, and LULAC. However, the court did not block the circulator affidavit requirement, the 90-day moratorium on signature verification, and the registration requirement for unpaid petition circulators who gather more than 25 signed petitions.
• June 30, 2025: Preliminary injunction hearing scheduled.
• June 4, 2025: The court ruled on the first motion for preliminary injunction, and granted only the motion with respect to the vagueness claim challenging the expanded definition of “racketeering activity.”
• May 22, 2025: Preliminary injunction hearing scheduled.
• May 4, 2025: Plaintiffs filed their complaint.