<em>Tedder</em>'s Not Dead: What Process is Due to Suspended Elected Officials in Florida?

This Note argues that a proper interpretation of Florida law recognizes property interests in elected office as an integral factor to be considered when assessing what process is due to suspended elected officials. Part I provides an overview of the theoretical underpinnings and modern evolution of procedural due process and property interests, particularly as they relate to public employment and elected office. Part II contrasts historical case law in Florida where property rights were recognized with a curious line of emerging case law that finds no such rights. Part III investigates and refutes the flawed reasoning behind recent opinions that have rejected the argument that property interests exist in public office. Finally, Part IV considers what process is due to suspended elected officials in Florida and highlights the need to safeguard against the potential politicization of that process. Ultimately, this Note warns that without ensuring authentically quasi-judicial removal hearings, Florida risks depriving elected officials of their constitutionally protected property rights without affording them adequate due process of law. This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2025-04-01
Primary Topic
Property Rights and Legal Doctrine
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Tedder's Not Dead: What Process is Due to Suspended Elected Officials in Florida?

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Property Rights and Legal Doctrine
article

Tedder's Not Dead: What Process is Due to Suspended Elected Officials in Florida?

article en

Abstract

This Note argues that a proper interpretation of Florida law recognizes property interests in elected office as an integral factor to be considered when assessing what process is due to suspended elected officials. Part I provides an overview of the theoretical underpinnings and modern evolution of procedural due process and property interests, particularly as they relate to public employment and elected office. Part II contrasts historical case law in Florida where property rights were recognized with a curious line of emerging case law that finds no such rights. Part III investigates and refutes the flawed reasoning behind recent opinions that have rejected the argument that property interests exist in public office. Finally, Part IV considers what process is due to suspended elected officials in Florida and highlights the need to safeguard against the potential politicization of that process. Ultimately, this Note warns that without ensuring authentically quasi-judicial removal hearings, Florida risks depriving elected officials of their constitutionally protected property rights without affording them adequate due process of law. This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Property Rights and Legal Doctrine
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

<em>Tedder</em>'s Not Dead: What Process is Due to Suspended Elected Officials in Florida? · eYLS (Yale Law School) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS