TALLAHASSEE, Florida — In a significant legal decision, a Florida appeals court on Wednesday rejected Governor Ron DeSantis’ claim that he can shield public records through executive privilege. This claim, if recognized, would have markedly expanded the governor’s ability to keep records confidential, a power not previously acknowledged under state law.
Setback for DeSantis and Attorney General Moody
The three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal delivered a setback to both DeSantis and Attorney General Ashley Moody. They had asserted that the governor’s office holds constitutional authority to protect records regarding internal discussions and deliberations. Initially, the court dismissed a lawsuit requesting the names of “legal conservative heavyweights” advising DeSantis on Florida Supreme Court appointments. However, this dismissal was based on procedural grounds, not the executive privilege argument.
Court’s Decision on Executive Privilege
Judge L. Clayton Roberts, writing for the panel, stated, “After denying the petition for procedural reasons, the court unnecessarily considered the merits of the petition and ruled the identities of the legal conservative heavyweights are protected by executive privilege. We expressly decline to rule on the propriety of this ruling as it was irrelevant and unnecessary.”
Background of the Legal Battle
This legal confrontation attracted the attention of multiple media organizations and began months before DeSantis’ failed presidential bid. An anonymous individual sought records identifying the “six or seven pretty big legal conservative heavyweights” that DeSantis mentioned during a 2022 interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt. DeSantis, who has significantly reshaped the Florida Supreme Court by appointing five of the seven justices, refused to release any identifying records, prompting the lawsuit.
In January 2023, Circuit Court Judge Angela Dempsey dismissed the lawsuit, partly on the grounds that the DeSantis administration could withhold some records due to executive privilege.
Implications for Florida’s Public Records Law
The ruling holds significant implications because Florida has not traditionally recognized executive privilege for the governor, contrasting with the federal government’s stance on the matter since President Richard Nixon’s era. Florida’s constitution guarantees public access to records, requiring a supermajority vote in the legislature to create exemptions.
Court’s Reasoning for Dismissal
The appeals court concluded that the case should have been dismissed due to the anonymous nature of the plaintiff and the overly broad request for records. The court noted that such requests should only proceed under “exceptional circumstances.” The judges found that the request would have necessitated asking the governor directly about the individuals involved, which was deemed impractical.
Media Coalition’s Response
Several media organizations, including the Associated Press, Gannett, CNN, the Miami Herald, the Tampa Bay Times, and the Orlando Sentinel, have expressed concerns over the ruling. They argued that upholding Dempsey’s decision would compromise government transparency and establish a “dangerous precedent by subverting the lawful process for creating new public-records exemptions.”
COMMENTS