3dbbae6a_rt_decisions___Tampa_Bay_Times__Impact_on_merit_retention
[Case name and date] Armstrong v. Harris, 9/7/00 [Case summary] This case invalidated a 1998 voter-approved constitutional amendment that addressed the state's methods for executing prisoners under the death penalty. Although voters approved the amendment, days before the election a challenge was filed saying that the amendment's title and ballot summary were both misleading and gave the false impression that the death penalty would be weakened without the measure. [Ruling] 4-3. Pariente sided with majority. Lewis and Quince dissented. [What majority said] The court agreed voters might have been confused by this amendment when they approved it and invalidated the vote retroactively. The part of the state constitution that included the language found in the amendment was thrown out. [Impact on merit retention] 
People who are hoping to get these justices removed from court have used this case as an example of judicial activism that devalued a vote after it took place. However, critics have ignored the fact that two of the justices up for merit retention dissented on this case.
Ahead of merit retention vote, Times/Herald charts controversial Supreme Court decisions | Tampa Bay Times
Impact on merit retention