Miami wants another day in court: City asks for rehearing in election case

MIAMI — The city of Miami wants another day in court.

Last week, a three-judge panel with Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal upheld a lower court’s ruling that found the city’s decision to postpone the November 2025 election to 2026 without voter approval was unconstitutional.

After two losses in court, the city is now asking for another shot. In a motion filed late Wednesday, the city requested a rehearing en banc, which means the entire appellate court would hear the case rather than a three-judge panel. The motion was authored by attorney Dwayne Robinson, whom the city hired as outside counsel for the case.

The Third DCA ruling landed two days after the three-judge panel heard oral arguments from the city, as well as from the attorney for mayoral candidate Emilio González, who sued in June after the Miami City Commission voted 3-2 to postpone the election to 2026 via ordinance rather than through a ballot referendum.

The appellate court agreed with a Miami-Dade Circuit Court judge, finding that moving the election date and changing the terms of office for the city’s elected officials requires voter approval via ballot referendum. Both courts ruled that the city’s ordinance was unconstitutional.

González issued a statement in response to the city’s latest motion, saying the case is about “an out of control government trying to steal an election from the people of Miami.”

“The City’s desperate appeals are a blatant attempt to run out the clock, hoping to prevent the Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections from preparing a ballot,” González said. “This isn’t just irresponsible — it’s reprehensible. It’s a coordinated assault on the democratic rights of our citizens.”

Elections attorney Juan-Carlos Planas, who represented North Miami residents when the city similarly moved its elections from odd to even years via ordinance, said the vast majority of requests for a rehearing en banc are denied. A denial is especially likely in this case, he said, because there was no dissent among the appellate judges.

Planas said the city could have petitioned directly to the Florida Supreme Court if it wanted to. Asking for a rehearing before the Third DCA, he said, causes additional delays.

The city’s motion lands less than three months before the scheduled Nov. 4, 2025 election, when residents are expected to vote on a new mayor and two city commissioners.

“The fact that they asked for a rehearing en banc this late is just — it’s kind of underhanded,” Planas said.

During a hearing last month before Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Valerie Manno Schurr, the parties stated that they need a final decision on appeal by Aug. 8.

Oren Rosenthal, an attorney for the county Elections Department, said at the hearing that the county is able to conduct the election on Nov. 4, “as long as we have a list of qualified candidates by September 20.”

Todd Hannon, the city clerk, said Thursday that his office is “ramping up” for the candidate qualifying period to begin in a few weeks. According to Hannon, candidate qualifying must begin on Sept. 5 and run through Sept. 20 in order for the election to take place on Nov. 4.

As the Miami Herald previously reported, Mayor Francis Suarez has been a proponent of the election date change, lobbying behind the scenes for the proposal and signing the ordinance into law the same day it was approved by the commission. Suarez is termed out of office at the end of the year, but if the election is postponed to 2026, Suarez — a former city commissioner — would get a 17th consecutive year in Miami City Hall.

Suarez said in a statement Thursday that he supports the city’s decision to seek a rehearing.

“We owe it to the residents of Miami — and, frankly, to all the residents of Miami-Dade County — to have this issue settled and clarified once and for all,” the mayor said.

After learning of the city’s request for a rehearing Thursday, Commissioner Joe Carollo — who voted against postponing the election — took aim at Suarez.

“This has to do with a desperate mayor, Francis Suarez, that doesn’t want to come down from his throne in Mt. Olympus and be a mortal again,” Carollo said.

In response, Suarez said Carollo’s comment was “rich coming from someone unlikable, who after losing a personal civil suit for more than $60 million and costing the city millions in legal fees, is now asking the City to appeal his case to the Florida Supreme Court. Only in Joe Carollo’s mind does that make any sense.”

_____

MIAMI — The city of Miami wants another day in court.

Last week, a three-judge panel with Florida’s 3rd District Court of Appeal upheld a lower court’s ruling that found the city’s decision to postpone the November 2025 election to 2026 without voter approval was unconstitutional.

The 3rd District Court of Appeal ruling landed two days after the three-judge panel heard oral arguments from the city, as well as from the attorney for mayoral candidate Emilio González, who sued in June after the Miami City Commission voted 3-2 to postpone the election to 2026 via ordinance rather than through a ballot referendum.

González issued a statement in response to the city’s latest motion, saying the case is about “an out of control government trying to steal an election from the people of Miami.”

Planas said the city could have petitioned directly to the Florida Supreme Court if it wanted to. Asking for a rehearing before the 3rd District Court of Appeal, he said, causes additional delays.

The city’s motion lands less than three months before the scheduled Nov. 4, 2025, election, when residents are expected to vote on a new mayor and two city commissioners.

“The fact that they asked for a rehearing en banc this late is just — it’s kind of underhanded,” Planas said.

During a hearing last month before Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Valerie Manno Schurr, the parties stated that they need a final decision on appeal by Aug. 8.

_____