[PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-11143 ____________________

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA INC., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, versus FLORIDA SECRETARY OF STATE, et al.,

Defendants-Appellants.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 4:21-cv-00186-MW-MAF ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-11143 Document: 193-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2023 Page: 2 of 79

2 Opinion of the Court 22-11143

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, and JILL PRYOR and GRANT, Circuit Judges. WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge:

This appeal involves four recently enacted provisions of Florida’s election law, including provisions that regulate ballot drop boxes, the solicitation of voters at the polls, and the delivery of voter-registration forms by third-party voter-registration organ- izations. Several plaintiff organizations sued the Florida Secretary of State, the Florida Attorney General, and several Supervisors of Elections. After a bench trial, the district court enjoined three pro- visions because it found they were adopted with the intent to dis- criminate against black voters in violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments as well as section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. And it imposed a preclearance requirement under section 3(c) of the Act. The district court also ruled that the solicitation provi- sion was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Finally, it enjoined a provi- sion that required third-party voter-registration organizations to provide a disclaimer to voters who use their services to register to vote, but all parties agree that any appeal of the judgment as to that provision has been rendered moot by the repeal of the provision. Because we hold that the findings of intentional racial discrimina- tion rest on both legal errors and clearly erroneous findings of fact and that only part of the solicitation provision is unconstitutional, we reverse in part, affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand. USCA11 Case: 22-11143 Document: 193-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2023 Page: 3 of 79

22-11143 Opinion of the Court 3

I. BACKGROUND

In recent decades, the Florida Legislature has amended the election code to make voting more convenient for eligible voters. In 1980, most voters had to cast their ballots in person at their local precincts. Voters could cast an absentee ballot only for one of six reasons: inability to vote in person without assistance, absence from the county on election day, service as an election official in a different precinct, religious observance, change of residency within the state too late to register at the new address, or change of resi- dency outside the state if the voter is unable to vote under the laws of the new state. FLA. STAT. § 101.64 (1980). State law required the voter to attest that he or she qualified to vote absentee, and the attestation had to be notarized or witnessed by two adults. Id. Since then,