Rick Scott v. George Williams — Pariente, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Pariente concurred in the majority's reversal, emphasizing that the case concerned only whether prospective changes to the state retirement plan impaired contractual rights, not the wisdom or fairness of the Legislature's policy choice. She reasoned that the preservation-of-rights statute protects accrued benefits but permits prospective changes to future benefits, and that this interpretation is compelled by controlling precedent and statutory meaning. Justices Canady and Labarga also concurred. Justices Lewis and Perry, dissenting, would have held that the changes substantially impaired contractual retirement rights and required reimbursement.