Florida Supreme Court appears inclined to uphold DeSantis’ suspension of Worrell

Florida Supreme Court justices appeared inclined during a Wednesday hearing to uphold the suspension of Orange-Osceola State Attorney Monique Worrell, with one likening Gov. Ron DeSantis’ executive order denouncing her prosecutorial record to a “criminal indictment.”

Worrell was joined in the courtroom gallery by dozens who traveled to Tallahassee to support her attempt at reinstatement. At the heart of her challenge to DeSantis’ Aug. 9 suspension order is her argument that the governor offered no evidence of policies or practices that her office implemented to avoid aggressively prosecuting the crimes he cited, from gun and drug offenses to cases involving youth suspects.

Florida Chief Deputy Solicitor General Jeffrey DeSousa, who represented the governor, argued that the validity of her removal from office ought to be decided by the State Senate and not the justices. Senators have put the matter on hold while the legal process plays out.

During the proceeding, it appeared that the justices tended to agree with DeSousa’s arguments that they lacked jurisdiction to reinstate her. In addition, some justices indicated that the allegations in the suspension order, regardless of the lack of specifics, appear to amount to negligence from Worrell’s office.

With most of the court appointed by DeSantis, the justices’ leanings come as little surprise. Still, a governor’s suspension of an elected State Attorney is a remarkable event, and many outside experts have said it raises legitimate legal questions, regardless of what the Florida Supreme Court decides.

In the Wednesday hearing, Justice John Laberga likened the reinstatement process to a trial, with senators playing the role of a jury. Justice Charles Canady also noted that their job is not to determine whether allegations of “neglect of duty” mentioned in the suspension order are valid.

“[The suspension order] makes assertions, but it doesn’t have to prove it. That’s what the trial in the Senate is for,” Canady said. “… That’s kind of a political question, it seems like to me: the scope of how the duty is understood and how that’s going to be defined.”

Laura Ferguson, who represented Worrell before the court, said past justices have traditionally toed the line regarding the court’s powers in deciding suspensions. Still, she argued the importance of Worrell’s prosecutorial discretion, which she added, did not lead her office to avoiding prosecuting certain types of cases, contrary to the governor’s claims.

“If a governor were able to remove a prosecutor of a different political party simply because they disagree with their policies then categorize that as neglect of duty or incompetence, then that will have a substantial chilling effect on how state attorneys perform their roles or their willingness to serve,” she said.

But DeSousa contended that prosecutorial discretion does not “insulate prosecutors from suspension.” He claimed prison admissions are low in the Ninth Judicial Circuit, which covers Orange and Osceola counties.

“If we had nothing else, if there was nothing specific she was doing and she was just not effective at prosecuting crime, we think that that would be enough,” DeSousa said.

There’s no set timeline for when a decision will be issued, a spokesperson for the Florida Supreme Court said. Court decisions are typically issued on Thursday.

Worrell held a press conference outside the courthouse immediately after the hearing, thanking her supporters who carried signs calling for her reinstatement. In her comments to reporters, she said she believes the justices are siding with DeSantis, pointing to the comparison of the suspension order to a criminal indictment.

“One of the key parts here that has kind of been the basis of my removal is that we didn’t put out any indictments that didn’t actually have facts in them. That’s a huge problem for the governor,” Worrell said. “In the same way he wanted me to prosecute cases without facts and without evidence, that is the type of case that the governor’s lawyers have sought to prosecute.”

The ousted state attorney has long held that her office refused to prosecute cases when law enforcement lacked evidence in their investigations. In the past, she has singled out drug trafficking cases handled by the Osceola County Sheriff’s Office in 2022, which were mentioned in DeSantis’ suspension order but which Worrell said were often unsubstantiated.

Worrell further pushed back against DeSousa’s use of prison data, arguing that crime has dropped throughout her time in office since she prosecuted cases “based on facts and evidence.”

“As state attorney, I don’t have a duty to maximize incarceration rates,” she said. “I have a duty only to seek justice.”