League of Women Voters of Florida v. Rick Scott, Governor
SC17-1122
| Fla. | Dec 14, 2017Background
- The League of Women Voters petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a writ of quo warranto to prohibit Governor Rick Scott from filling appellate-court vacancies that would arise when three justices’ terms expire in January 2019.
- Governor Scott had publicly announced his intent in December 2016 to appoint replacements, but no appointments had been made when the petition was filed.
- The League sought preemptive judicial review of the Governor’s prospective appointment power under the quo warranto writ.
- The Court dismissed the petition, holding the matter not ripe because no gubernatorial action to appoint had occurred.
- Separate opinions: a concurrence in result stressed the issue was unripe but noted concessions by the Governor’s counsel; a dissent argued quo warranto can reach threatened or imminent acts and criticized the majority’s ripeness rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether quo warranto can be used to challenge the Governor's prospective appointments before any appointment is made | League: writ may issue to prohibit the Governor from attempting unconstitutional future appointments based on announced intent | Governor: writ not appropriate because no appointment has occurred; case is unripe | Court: Dismissed petition — quo warranto is historically directed at acts already taken; matter not ripe until some action occurs |
| Whether prior practice/precedent permits pre-appointment quo warranto (including Lerman and other authorities) | League: prior Florida and out-of-state decisions permit quo warranto against threatened or imminent acts; Lerman supports pre-appointment relief | Governor: reliance on cases addressing completed acts; here no final act to review | Court: Majority emphasized historical use against completed acts; concurrence and dissent disagreed, citing precedents that allow preemptive relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Fla. House of Representatives v. Crist, 999 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2008) (discusses quo warranto as remedy to test state officers’ exercise of power)
- Swoope v. City of New Smyrna, 125 So. 371 (Fla. 1929) (quo warranto applies after usurpation; advisory relief not appropriate)
- Whiley v. Scott, 79 So. 3d 702 (Fla. 2011) (review of completed executive action via quo warranto)
- State ex rel. Butterworth v. Kenny, 714 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1998) (addressed public-interest issue despite related litigation having ceased)
- Ayala v. Scott, 224 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2017) (quo warranto used to challenge executive reassignments already made)
- Advisory Opinion to the Governor re Judicial Vacancy Due to Mandatory Retirement, 940 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 2006) (vacancy in merit-retention judicial office occurs only at term expiration)