In a closely watched case, Florida's conservative-leaning Supreme Court expressed skepticism on Wednesday regarding a Democratic prosecutor's attempt to regain her position after being ousted by Governor Ron DeSantis. The court also showed doubt about a separate request from DeSantis' lawyers to eliminate future legal challenges to his suspension powers.

Monique Worrell, a Democratic prosecutor elected by voters in Orange and Osceola counties, was removed by DeSantis in August. The governor argued that Worrell's leniency towards criminals posed a threat to public safety. Worrell, however, believes her suspension was politically motivated and argues that the governor cannot rely solely on prosecutorial discretion as evidence of neglect or incompetence.

During the hearing, Worrell, accompanied by a crowd of supporters from the Orlando area, expressed hope that the court would rule in her favor. She criticized DeSantis' actions as "authoritarian" and warned that a decision in favor of the governor would set a precedent for removing Democrats from office solely based on political affiliation.

The ruling in this case holds significant implications, given DeSantis' broad use of his suspension powers compared to previous governors. He has removed elected officials, such as a sheriff and an elections supervisor, primarily based on job performance rather than waiting for their arrests.

The justices appeared uncertain over whether it was their role to decide Worrell's case. They indicated that the Florida Senate should review the facts surrounding her suspension and have the power to either uphold or reinstate her. Justice Charles Canady, a former GOP member of Congress appointed to the court by former Governor Charlie Crist, emphasized that determining neglect of duty falls within the constitutional responsibility of the governor and the Senate.

While some statistics provided by the governor's office were considered substantial evidence of misconduct, Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz and Justice John Couriel, both appointed by DeSantis, acknowledged the court's previous deference to the governor's power. Muñiz noted that the court had upheld suspensions in the past, including that of the Broward county sheriff, partly due to his response to the Parkland mass shooting.

The court dismissed a legal challenge filed by Andrew Warren, the Hillsborough County prosecutor also removed by DeSantis prior to his re-election. Justices stated that Warren had delayed taking action, leading to the rejection of his case.

Representing the DeSantis administration, Jeffrey DeSousa argued that Worrell's case was a "political question" and suggested limiting legal challenges in such instances. However, Muñiz expressed discomfort with this viewpoint, remarking that the court's duty was to hear such cases, potentially suggesting a departure from established precedent dating back to the 1930s.

Justice Jorge Labarga, often at odds with other justices in major cases and appointed by Crist, raised concerns about the potential chilling effect of the suspension. He questioned whether prosecutors would feel compelled to consult the governor's office before making decisions on prosecuting crimes.

Financial and personal strain due to the legal battle prompted Worrell to bring her case to the court, as she doubted a fair evaluation from the GOP-controlled Senate. She referred to their decisions supporting DeSantis in conflicts with Disney and redrawing congressional maps that dismantled a seat held by a Black Democrat.

Worrell remained resolute, vowing to seek re-election as state attorney in 2024. The outcome of this case will be closely watched, given its potential impact on the balance of power between governors and elected officials in Florida.