Floridians Protecting Freedom, Inc. v. Passidomo
The sponsor of the November 2024 abortion ballot amendment sought a writ of quo warranto challenging the Financial Impact Estimating Conference's authority to issue, on its own initiative, a revised financial impact statement. The Supreme Court denied the petition without reaching the merits, holding the petitioners waived or forfeited any claim to extraordinary relief because they actively participated in the revision process without objecting to the Conference's authority and later told the First District that the revised statement was the operative one.
Key facts
- Floridians Protecting Freedom, Inc., sponsor of a November 2024 abortion ballot amendment, petitioned for a writ of quo warranto against the Financial Impact Estimating Conference challenging its authority to issue a revised financial impact statement on its own initiative.
- The petitioner actively participated in the Conference's revision process without objecting to its authority, and later represented to the First District Court of Appeal that the revised statement was the operative one.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
The decision supplies a transferable, non-merits ground for defeating extraordinary writ petitions: acquiescence and estoppel arising from a petitioner's participation in the challenged process and inconsistent… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.