How do Florida ethics enforcement and prosecutorial referral processes work in cases involving former attorneys general?

1. How complaints enter Florida’s system — multiple doors, different rules

Complaints about alleged ethics breaches by public officers can be filed directly with the Florida Commission on Ethics or come to it by referral from the Governor, State Attorneys, U.S. Attorneys, or the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; the Commission then transmits copies to alleged violators and moves into investigative steps under state statute and its procedures ^{[2] [5]}. Separately, The Florida Bar accepts grievances about lawyers’ conduct — a route used in high-profile filings against Pam Bondi — but the Bar’s investigatory scope and constitutional limitations can affect whether it proceeds ^{[3] [4]}.

2. Who enforces and who prosecutes — an institutional split

The Commission on Ethics serves as the independent fact‑finder and policymaker for Florida’s public‑official ethics code; it does not itself conduct prosecutions in court. Instead, prosecutions arising from Commission determinations are handled by attorneys assigned from the Attorney General’s Office — the Commission’s “Advocates” are Assistant Attorneys General — or by referrals to state prosecutors as appropriate ^{[1] [2] [6]}. This creates an operational link between the Ethics Commission’s civil enforcement track and Florida’s prosecutorial apparatus ^[2].

3. Special considerations for former Attorneys General and post‑employment rules

The ethics law toolbox includes “post‑public‑employment” restrictions and lobbying/representation limits intended to prevent a revolving‑door advantage, but their application can be complex for high‑level offices. Staff advisory opinions have addressed whether former state prosecutors may later represent clients against their former offices, concluding that representation of new cases that arise after public service may not automatically violate ethics rules — while also warning that other Rules Regulating The Florida Bar or disclosure statutes could apply ^[7]. Available sources do not lay out a single, automatic bar for former state attorneys general representing clients; instead, advisory opinions and statutory text must be read case‑by‑case ^[7].

4. Federal officials and the Florida Bar — a jurisdictional wrinkle

When complaints target someone serving as a federal officer, like a U.S. Attorney General who is also a Florida Bar member, The Florida Bar has sometimes declined to investigate on jurisdictional grounds tied to the nature of the office and constitutional appointment; news coverage shows the Bar rejecting certain complaints against a sitting U.S. Attorney General while still documenting filings ^{[3] [4]}. That creates a tension: Floridians and state bar members can file complaints, but the Bar’s decision whether to investigate a sitting federal appointee may turn on legal and procedural limits ^[4].

5. What the process can lead to — remedies and limits

If the Commission finds probable cause, it can recommend civil penalties and refer matters for prosecution; its annual and meeting reports show it issues recommendations to governors and can suggest fines or other administrative outcomes ^{[2] [8]}. The Commission’s determinations are subject to judicial review, and appellate rulings can overturn Commission applications of law, underlining that enforcement outcomes are not final until tested in court ^[9].

6. Political and institutional pressures — why disputes escalate

High‑profile complaints often involve layers of political signaling: coalitions of law professors and former justices may file complaints to pressure oversight bodies, while defendants and their allies may emphasize jurisdictional limits to avoid state discipline — a dynamic seen in recent filings against Pam Bondi where both substantive ethics allegations and jurisdictional defenses appeared in reporting ^{[3] [10]}. The Commission’s membership and the fact that its prosecutorial advocates come from the Attorney General’s Office create unavoidable perceptions of institutional linkage that critics on either side will spotlight ^{[11] [2]}.

7. Takeaway for someone tracking cases involving former attorneys general

Expect overlapping processes: The Florida Commission on Ethics handles public‑official complaints and can trigger prosecutions via Assistant Attorneys General ^[2]; The Florida Bar handles lawyer‑discipline complaints but may limit or decline investigations into sitting federal officers ^{[3] [4]}; and post‑employment restrictions are assessed on the facts and applicable advisory opinions rather than by an across‑the‑board rule ^[7]. Readers should monitor both Commission orders and Bar rulings and note that appellate decisions and inter‑agency referrals frequently shape final outcomes ^{[9] [2]}.

Limitations: reporting is based on available state and news sources provided; available sources do not provide a single flowchart or exhaustive statute-by‑statute parsing of every possible post‑employment restriction for former attorneys general ^{[7] [2]}.