Justices Delay Decision in
Minimum Wage
Ordinance
News Service of Florida
The Florida Supreme Court rejected a request by the city of Miami Beach for quick action in a
battle about the legality of a local minimum wage. The city this month asked the Supreme Court
to “expedite” consideration of its challenge to a lower-court decision that blocked the minimum
wage. But the Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision Thursday, turned down the request.
Chief Justice Charles Canady and justices
Peggy Quince, Ricky Polston, Jorge Labarga
and Alan Lawson were in the majority, while
justices Barbara Pariente and R. Fred Lewis
dissented. The one-page order did not explain
the court’s reasoning.
The underlying case stems from an ordinance
that Miami Beach passed in 2016 to phase in a
higher minimum wage. The ordinance had been
planned to set the minimum wage in the city at
$10.31 an hour this year, with annual incremental
increases to $13.31 an hour in January 2021. The
statewide minimum wage this year is $8.25 an
hour. But opponents such as the Florida Retail
Federation, the Florida Chamber of Commerce
and the Florida Restaurant & Lodging
Association challenged the legality of setting a
local minimum wage.
The 3rd District Court of Appeal agreed with the
opponents, leading Miami Beach to take the
case to the Supreme Court. The city asked the
Supreme Court to rule by Jan. 1, which could
allow a higher minimum wage to take effect
at the start of the new year if the city wins the
case. But attorneys for the state and business
groups objected to speeding up consideration
of the case.
“Petitioner (Miami Beach) fails to demonstrate
that this case merits special treatment,” Attorney
General Pam Bondi’s office argued in a brief.
“Every time this (Supreme) Court reviews a
lower court’s decision, a party has lost and is
dissatisfied with the status quo. This is no less
true of cases involving the validity of a state law
or local ordinance, or cases that otherwise are
of public interest. Petitioner’s basis for its request
boils down to an assertion that whenever a law
or ordinance is enjoined by a lower court and this
(Supreme) Court grants review, it should rush
the briefing and decision-making process and
prioritize the timing over the quality of its decision.”
OCTOBER 2018 • DITCHMEN
11