May, 27 2014, 04:13pm EDT

ACLU Discovers State Spent Nearly $400,000 on Attorneys Pushing Gov. Scott's Mandatory Urinalysis Cases
A public records investigation by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida has found that the state of Florida has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys' fees and legal expenses pushing for mandatory suspicionless urinalysis policies championed by Florida Gov. Rick Scott, even after federal courts found the policies unconstitutional.
MIAMI, FL
A public records investigation by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida has found that the state of Florida has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys' fees and legal expenses pushing for mandatory suspicionless urinalysis policies championed by Florida Gov. Rick Scott, even after federal courts found the policies unconstitutional.
The majority of the costs were incurred after initial court decisions ruling the two policies unconstitutional: a 2011 law requiring applicants for the state's Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to submit to drug testing as a condition of receiving benefits, and a 2011 executive order issued by Gov. Scott mandating state employees under the governor's purview do the same as a condition of employment. In all, the ACLU discovered that as of May 7, 2014, the state has spent $381,654.45 on the cases, not including staff attorneys' salaries or court-ordered attorneys' fees--not to mention the costs of administering the drug testing programs in the first place.
"Every court that has heard Gov. Scott's argument that the state has the power to compel people to submit their bodily fluids for government inspection without suspicion of wrongdoing has rejected it as a violation of the constitution's protections against unreasonable searches," stated ACLU of Florida staff attorney Shalini Goel Agarwal, lead attorney in the state employee drug testing case. "Nevertheless, the governor is spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars paying private lawyers to push the extreme idea that government can treat anyone like a suspected criminal and compel them to give up their constitutional rights. It's become a costly and embarrassing boondoggle for Floridians."
The urinalysis law for TANF applicants was enjoined by a federal judge in 2011 after the ACLU of Florida challenged it. The governor had promoted the law as a cost-saving measure, stating that applicants for TANF use drugs at a higher rate than others. However during the few months the law was in place, so few tested positive that the state spent more reimbursing applicants for the tests than it saved on those who tested positive, and then, after the preliminary injunction was issued, the state spent thousands more on back benefits that were wrongfully denied. The governor nevertheless appealed the preliminary injunction, which was upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The district court issued a final ruling declaring the law unconstitutional on New Year's Eve 2013. But Gov. Scott, still not convinced, filed a second appeal in the TANF case, which is again pending in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Gov. Scott's executive order mandating state employee urinalysis was challenged by the ACLU of Florida on behalf of the members of the state's largest public employee union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 79. In April 2012, a district court enjoined the executive order, declaring it violated the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches. The state appealed that decision, and in May of 2013, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the state's argument that the government has the authority to require all employees be drug tested as a condition of employment. Gov. Scott appealed that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in April 2014 refused to hear the case, leaving the 11th Circuit decision in place.
Between the two cases, Gov. Scott has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring outside attorneys and paying lawyers at the state attorney general's office to try to overturn the lower courts' decisions declaring the policies unconstitutional. The costs are expected to grow, as Gov. Scott has continued the legal fight for both policies despite the uninterrupted string of court losses.
In the state employee urinalysis case, because Gov. Scott continues to argue before the court that most of his work force should be subject to testing, the state must pay 2/3 of the costs of a court-appointed "special master" to sort through the tens of thousands of jobs which the governor insists are high security jobs that require mandatory urinalysis as a public safety matter. These allegedly "high security" jobs include typists, store clerks, and workers with long commutes. The first status conference with the special master is scheduled for Wednesday, May 28th, and the costs to the state are already accumulating.
In order to expedite the end of the state employee urinalysis case, the ACLU has filed a motion for summary judgment, asking the court to issue a final ruling definitively striking down the overly-broad executive order as to those employees for whom the governor has come up with no reason for testing, even after the 11th Circuit made clear he needed to show a "special need" for each job category he sought to test.
"Gov. Scott's unconstitutional ideological crusade has cost the people of Florida too much for too long," added Agarwal. "The government can't treat people like suspected criminals and force them to submit to invasive and humiliating searches without a public safety reason or reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. No amount of costly legal tap dancing is likely to change that. Gov. Scott needs to read the writing on the wall, cut his losses, and end this expensive campaign against Floridians' Fourth Amendment rights."
The ACLU of Florida's public records requests and the documents obtained in the state's response are available here: https://aclufl.org/resources/public-records-requests-legal-costs-promoti...
The ACLU of Florida's motion for summary judgment in the AFSCME case is available here: https://aclufl.org/resources/motion-for-partial-summary-judgement-afscme...
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
Richest 0.001% Now Own Three Times More Wealth Than Poorest Half of Humanity Combined
"The choices we make in the coming years will determine whether the global economy continues down a path of extreme concentration or moves toward shared prosperity."
Dec 10, 2025
A landmark report on global inequality published Wednesday shows that the chasm between the richest slice of humanity and everyone else continued to expand this year, leaving the top 0.001%—fewer than 60,000 multimillionaires—with three times more wealth than the poorest half of the world's population combined.
The global wealth gap has become so staggering, and its impact on economies and democratic institutions so corrosive, that policymakers should treat it as an emergency, argues the third edition of the World Inequality Report, a comprehensive analysis that draws on the work of hundreds of scholars worldwide. Ricardo Gómez-Carrera, a researcher at the World Inequality Lab, is the report's lead author.
"Inequality has long been a defining feature of the global economy, but by 2025, it has reached levels that demand urgent attention," reads the new report. "The benefits of globalization and economic growth have flowed disproportionately to a small minority, while much of the world’s population still face difficulties in achieving stable livelihoods. These divides are not inevitable. They are the outcome of political and institutional choices."
The richest 10% of the global population, according to the latest data, own three-quarters of the world's wealth and capture more income than the rest of humanity. Within most countries, it is rare for the bottom 50% to control more than 5% of national wealth.
"This concentration is not only persistent, but it is also accelerating," the report observes. "Since the 1990s, the wealth of billionaires and centimillionaires has grown at approximately 8% annually, nearly twice the rate of growth experienced by the bottom half of the population. The poorest have made modest gains, but these are overshadowed by the extraordinary accumulation at the very top."
"The result," the report adds, "is a world in which a tiny minority commands unprecedented financial power, while billions remain excluded from even basic economic stability."
The report comes as the world's richest and most powerful nation, led by President Donald Trump, abandons international cooperation on climate and taxation and works to supercharge inequality by slashing domestic and foreign aid programs while delivering massive handouts to the wealthiest Americans.
Jayati Ghosh, a member of the G20 Extraordinary Committee of Independent Experts on Global Inequality and co-author of the forward to the new report, said in a statement that "we live in a system where resources extracted from labor and nature in low-income countries continue to sustain the prosperity and the unsustainable lifestyle of people in high-income economies and rich elites across countries."
"These patterns are not accidents of markets," said Ghosh. "They reflect the legacy of history and the functioning of institutions, regulations and policies—all of which are related to unequal power relations that have yet to be rebalanced.”
Reversing the decadeslong trend of exploding inequality will require the political will to pursue obvious solutions, including fair taxation of the mega-rich and bold investments in social programs and climate action, which is disproportionately fueled by the wealthy.
"The choices we make in the coming years," the report says, "will determine whether the global economy continues down a path of extreme concentration or moves toward shared prosperity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Defeat for Justice': Ecuador to Pay Amazon-Polluting Chevron $220 Million
"A debt is not owed to Chevron. A debt is owed to the Amazonian families still waiting for truth, justice, and full reparation."
Dec 09, 2025
A US advocacy group, American human rights lawyer Steven Donziger, and the group in Ecuador behind a historic legal battle against Chevron over its dumping of toxic waste in the Amazon rainforest are condemning the Ecuadorian government's plans to pay the oil giant hundreds of millions of dollars due to an arbitration ruling.
In response to the legal fight in Ecuador that led to a $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron—which bought Texaco—the fossil fuel company turned to the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, suing the South American country in the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration. As part of the latter case, Ecuadorian Attorney General Diana Salazar Méndez's office announced Monday that the government would pay the US company only around $220 million, rather than the over $3 billion Chevron sought.
While Chevron said in a statement that it was "pleased with the resolution of this matter" and claimed the decision "strengthened the rule of law globally," and Salazar Méndez's office celebrated the dramatically lower figure, and the Union of Peoples Affected by Chevron-Texaco (UDAPT)—the group that began the case against oil company in 1993—pushed back against the government's framing of the reduction "as if it was a success and an economic achievement."
"The reality is it is a defeat for justice," UDAPT argued in a Tuesday statement. "For 32 years, UDAPT has documented pollution, environmental crime, and lives broken by Chevron, proving what should be obvious: Communities have not recovered, health has not been restored, clean water has not returned, and the territories that sustain life remain contaminated. A debt is not owed to Chevron. A debt is owed to the Amazonian families still waiting for truth, justice, and full reparation."
Amazon Watch deputy director Paul Paz y Miño similarly said Tuesday that "this illegitimate arbitration process is nothing more than Chevron abusing the law to escape accountability for one of the worst oil disasters in history."
"Ecuador's courts ruled correctly and based largely on Chevron's own evidence, that Chevron deliberately poisoned Indigenous and rural communities, leaving behind a mass cancer zone in the Amazon," the campaigner continued. "Adding insult to injury, the idea that Ecuador's people should now pay a US oil company that admitted to deliberate pollution is the epitome of environmental racism."
Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa "must not honor this ISDS award, and the international community must stand behind the victims of Chevron's crimes and demand that the company clean up Ecuador once and for all," Paz y Miño added. "Amazon Watch stands with the affected Indigenous peoples and communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. We urge President Noboa to reject this illegitimate award, disclose any negotiations with Chevron, and enforce Ecuadorian law by ensuring Chevron pays its debt to those it poisoned."
Donziger—who was detained in the United States for nearly 1,000 days after Chevron went after him in the American legal system for representing Big Oil's victims in Ecuador—was also sharply critical, saying Tuesday that "the decision by a so-called private corporate arbitration panel that claims to absolve Chevron of its massive pollution liability in Ecuador has no legitimacy and does not affect the historic $9.5 billion damages judgment won by Amazonian communities."
"That judgment still stands as the definitive public court ruling in the case," he said. "The private arbitral panel has no authority over the six public appellate courts, including the Supreme Courts of Ecuador and Canada, that issued unanimous decisions against Chevron and confirmed the extensive evidence that the company devastated local communities by deliberately dumping billions of gallons of cancer-causing oil waste into rivers and streams used by thousands of people for drinking, bathing, and fishing."
"I also strongly condemn President Daniel Noboa for his plans to betray his own people by agreeing to send $220 million from the public treasury to Chevron, a company that owes Ecuador billions under multiple court orders for poisoning vulnerable Indigenous peoples with toxic oil waste," Donziger added. "Noboa would effectively grant Chevron a taxpayer-funded bailout financed by the same citizens who remain victims of the company's pollution. This would be an outrageous dereliction of duty and a violation of his oath of office, warranting removal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Judge Tosses GOP Lawsuit, Missouri Voters Submit Signatures for Referendum on Rigged Map
"The citizens of Missouri have spoken loudly and clearly: They deserve fair maps, not partisan manipulation,” said one campaigner.
Dec 09, 2025
Opponents of Missouri's GOP-rigged congressional map on Tuesday submitted more than twice the required number of signatures supporting a referendum on the redistricting scheme backed by US President Donald Trump, a move that followed a federal judge's refusal to block the initiative.
The political action committee People Not Politicians turned in more than 300,000 signatures in support of the referendum to Republican Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins' office in what the group called an "unprecedented show of grassroots power."
The submission—which filled 691 boxes—will be reviewed by state election officials tasked with certifying the validity of the roughly 110,000 signatures required for qualification on the November 2026 ballot. If the signatures are approved, the state would be temporarily prohibited from adopting the new map until after the referendum vote.
Hoskins initially rejected People Not Politicians' referendum petition because Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, had not yet signed the redrawn map into law. Hoskins said he would reject any signatures collected before Kehoe approved the map in September. At that time, People Not Politicians had collected around 92,000 signatures.
“The citizens of Missouri have spoken loudly and clearly: They deserve fair maps, not partisan manipulation,” People Not Politicians executive director Richard von Glahn said in a statement. “We are submitting a record number of signatures to shut down any doubt that Missouri voters want a say.”
The submission followed a Monday ruling by US District Judge Zachary Bluestone—a Trump appointee—rejecting Republican Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway's bid to block the referendum on grounds that the court had no jurisdiction over a lawsuit filed by Hoskins and the GOP-controlled state Legislature arguing that state referendums on congressional maps are unconstitutional.
Supporters of Missouri's referendum are seeking to block redistricting legislation passed in September as part of Trump's push for Republican-controlled state legislatures to rig congressional maps in a bid to preserve GOP control of Congress by eliminating Democratic-leaning districts.
Texas was the first state to do Trump’s bidding by approving a new congressional map that could help Republicans gain five additional House seats. Last week, the US Supreme Court's right-wing majority gave Texas Republicans a green light to use the rigged map in next year's election.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded to Texas' move by spearheading a successful ballot initiative to redraw the Golden State's congressional map in favor his party. Under pressure from Trump, Republican lawmakers in Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina launched their own gerrymandering efforts.
In Missouri, Republicans are aiming to win seven of the state's eight congressional seats, including by flipping the 5th District, which is currently held by Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.
Responding to Tuesday's signature submission, Missouri state Rep. Ray Reed (D-83) said on social media that "today, the people of Missouri did something powerful. Organizers across our state: young folks, retirees, faith leaders, neighbors talking to neighbors, came together to defend the idea that in a democracy, voters should choose their leaders, not the other way around."
"Missouri just showed the country what fighting back looks like and I’m proud to stand with the people who made it happen," Reed added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


