The proposition restored the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation.

[9] Shortly after succeeding Crist as governor, Rick Scott, with the advice of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, ended the automatic restoration for felons convicted of non-violent crimes in the state and instituted a mandatory five-year wait period before felons could apply to the State Board of Executive Clemency for restoration of voting rights.

The plaintiffs in the case, Hand v. Scott, alleged the process is unconstitutional due to its arbitrary nature.

[19] An analysis conducted by The Palm Beach Post demonstrated that Scott discriminated against African Americans in re-enfranchisement hearings and favored Republicans.

He led a drive to qualify Amendment 4 as a ballot initiative for the 2018 Florida elections, collecting 799,000 signatures.

[22] Freedom Partners, a nonprofit group funded in part by the Koch brothers, also supported the amendment.

[24] Some Democratic Party politicians, including Crist, Andrew Gillum, Gwen Graham, Al Lawson, and Alan Williams supported Amendment 4, while some Republican politicians, including Ron DeSantis, Adam Putnam, and Richard Corcoran, opposed it.

The amendment went into effect on January 8, 2019, making an estimated 1.4 million people with felony convictions eligible to register to vote.

Originating in the Florida Senate, SB 7066, it required that "people with felony records pay 'all fines and fees' associated with their sentence prior to the restoration of their voting rights".

However, defining those unable to pay, the ruling broadly creates two categories: those who were appointed an attorney because they could not afford one and anyone whose financial obligations were converted to civil liens.

He also ordered the state to make the related changes to the state voter registration form and create a process in which felons could formally request an advisory opinion on how much they owe, and election officials would have to respond within three weeks or the felon would be allowed to register to vote by default.

In the case of a loss on the constitutional claims, the state had made two main secondary arguments at trial.

The state argued that if the ballot initiative's language requiring all felons to complete their sentences was unconstitutional in part or in whole, the entire amendment needed to be struck down, as it was nonseverable.