[Felony disenfranchisement laws are rooted in the Jim Crow era and
were implemented to suppress Black electoral power]
[[link removed]]

THE MOVEMENT TO RESTORE EX-FELONS’ VOTING RIGHTS IS NOW FOCUSING ON
THE STATES  
[[link removed]]


 

Benjamin Barber
June 11, 2022
Common Dreams
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Felony disenfranchisement laws are rooted in the Jim Crow era and
were implemented to suppress Black electoral power _

Michael Monfluery, 38, who has never been eligible to vote, stands in
a courthouse corridor following special court hearing aimed at
restoring the right to vote under Florida's amendment 4 in a
Miami-Dade County courtroom on November 8, 2019, in Miami, FL, ZAK
BENNETT/AFP via Getty Images

 

IN RECENT YEARS, VOTING rights advocates and state lawmakers have
made significant strides in restoring voting rights to U.S. citizens
with felony convictions.

In the 2020 U.S. presidential election, 5.17 million people were
disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, according to the
Sentencing Project
[[link removed]] —
15% fewer than in 2016, as states implemented measures to restore
voting rights to people with felony convictions who served their
sentences. From 2016 to 2020, at least 13 states expanded to some
degree voting rights for ex-felons, including the Southern states
of Alabama
[[link removed]], Florida
[[link removed]], Kentucky
[[link removed]], Louisiana
[[link removed]],
and Virginia
[[link removed]].

Historians point out that felony disenfranchisement laws are rooted
in the Jim Crow era
[[link removed]] and
were implemented to suppress Black electoral power. After Black men
were granted the right to vote in 1870, Southern states started to
adopt such laws, along with others designed to prevent Black voters
from casting a ballot. According to a 2003 study
[[link removed]] from scholars
at the University of Minnesota and Northwestern University, the
greater a state's nonwhite prison population, the more likely it was
to adopt stringent felony disenfranchisement laws. Currently, 11
states still permanently disenfranchise
[[link removed]] at
least some individuals from voting due to past criminal convictions,
including five in the South: Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi,
and Tennessee.

These laws continue to have a disproportionate impact on Black people
and communities of color. For example, as of 2020 more than one in
seven Black adults were disenfranchised
[[link removed]] in
six of the 13 Southern states — Alabama, Florida, Kentucky,
Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia.

With the midterm elections now underway, efforts are continuing in
several Southern states to restore voting rights to people with felony
convictions who've completed their sentences. Those efforts could
potentially have some impact on the outcome of the elections: A 2019
study
[[link removed]] found
that laws re-enfranchising ex-felons had a "positive, but not
statistically significant, effect" on the vote share of Democratic
candidates and turnout rates of minority voters in U.S. House
elections.

Voting rights activists had pressed Congress to pass federal
legislation to restore the franchise to ex-felons nationwide. But in
January, the Democrats' far-reaching pro-democracy bill
[[link removed]] failed
to garner enough votes to overcome threats of a Republican filibuster.
The measure would have established one national standard for restoring
rights by mandating that a person's right to vote could not be "denied
or abridged because that individual has been convicted of a criminal
offense unless such individual is serving a felony sentence in a
correctional institution or facility at the time of the election." As
a consequence, the movement to restore ex-felons' voting rights is now
focusing on the states.

A COURT CHALLENGE IN MISSISSIPPI

Earlier this year in Mississippi, the legislature passed Senate Bill
2536 [[link removed]], a
Republican-sponsored proposal that would have made it easier for
individuals with felony convictions to regain their voting rights
after completing their sentences. However, Gov. Tate Reeves (R) vetoed
it. Mississippi remains among the fewer than 10 states
[[link removed]] nationwide
that do not automatically restore voting rights to people convicted of
felonies after they complete their sentence. The law derives from
the state's constitutional convention of 1890
[[link removed]] that
sought to develop a plan to block Black people from voting. State
officials adopted a provision that barred voting by people convicted
of specific felonies — and the crimes they chose to include were
those they thought Black people were more likely to commit. There are
currently 23 specific crimes
[[link removed]] that
result in a lifelong voting ban in the state.

Under current Mississippi law, voting rights can be restored only by a
gubernatorial pardon or legislation that passes both the state House
and Senate by a two-thirds vote. Mississippi is the only state in the
nation that typically requires legislative action to restore
ex-felons' voting rights. During the 2022 state legislative session,
lawmakers took action to restore voting rights to just five people,
while only 185 Mississippians convicted of felonies have had their
voting rights restored by the legislature since 1997, The
Guardian reports
[[link removed]].
And 2018 data shows that while Black people account for just 36% of
the state's population they make up 61% of Mississippians who have
lost their right to vote due to a felony conviction.

The Mississippi Constitution's felony disenfranchisement provision is
currently being challenged in federal court
[[link removed]] for
its racist intent by a 2017 lawsuit filed by the Mississippi Center
for Justice on behalf of Roy Harness and Kamal Karriem
[[link removed]].
Last year a three-judge panel of the conservative 5th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals rejected efforts to continue the lawsuit, but then
last June the court agreed to rehear the case, and there were oral
arguments in September. A ruling is expected in the coming months. The
decision will determine the constitutionality of the
disenfranchisement provisions and the fate of former felons waiting to
regain their right to vote

"At a time when most states have repealed their disfranchisement laws,
it is time to remove from Mississippi's constitution this backward
provision that was enacted with such a vicious purpose," said
[[link removed]] Vangela
M. Wade, president and CEO of Mississippi Center for Justice.

ANOTHER LAWSUIT IN NORTH CAROLINA

In North Carolina, the fight for ex-felon voting rights is also being
waged in the courts. In March, a three-judge Superior Court
panel struck down a 1973 law
[[link removed]] that
prevented people from voting while serving active sentences —
including when they are on probation or parole.

The lawsuit
[[link removed]] was
originally filed against Republican legislative leaders in 2019 on
behalf of several voting and civil rights groups including Community
Success Initiative, Justice Served NC, the North Carolina NAACP, Wash
Away Unemployment, and individuals convicted of felonies. "People who
work, live, and pay taxes in our communities should not have their
voices & votes silenced due to a previous felony conviction," tweeted
[[link removed]] Forward
Justice, a Durham-based legal organization representing the
plaintiffs.

The court found
[[link removed]] that
the law was rooted in 19th-century white supremacy and had a disparate
impact on Black people, who make up 20% of the state's voting age
population but 40% of those who lost their voting rights for a felony
conviction, according to 2018 data referenced in the lawsuit. The
panel ruled that individuals who have completed their active prison
time will be able to vote in the November elections. The
decision could affect roughly 56,000 people
[[link removed]],
according to court testimony.

However, Republican state House Speaker Tim Moore and state Senate
leader Phil Berger appealed the decision
[[link removed]] to
the Republican-controlled North Carolina Court of Appeals. But last
month, the Democratic-controlled state Supreme Court announced that it
would take over the lawsuit per a request from the plaintiffs rather
than wait for the Court of Appeals to rule. The move makes it more
likely that the case will be resolved before the November general
election.

A PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN VIRGINIA

And in Virginia, Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, announced
[[link removed].] last
month that he had restored voting rights to 3,496 individuals with
felony convictions. "Individuals with their rights restored come from
every walk of life and are eager to provide for themselves, their
families and put the past behind them for a better tomorrow," Youngkin
said. Though Virginia is among the states that permanently bar people
with felony convictions from voting, the state constitution gives the
governor the ability to restore voting rights to those who complete
their criminal sentences. Both Republican and Democratic governors in
Virginia have led rights restoration efforts for ex-felons in recent
years.

Last year a constitutional amendment
[[link removed]] that
would have automatically restored voting rights for felons upon
completion of their incarceration. The bill passed the General
Assembly last year, when Democrats led both the state House and
Senate, but it was thwarted once Republicans took control of the House
— despite support across the political spectrum from groups
including the American Conservative Union, Americans for Prosperity
Virginia, the ACLU of Virginia, the Legal Aid Justice Center, the
League of Women Voters of Virginia, the Virginia Interfaith Center for
Public Policy, the Virginia Catholic Conference, and the Virginia
NAACP.

Because Virginia law requires a proposed constitutional amendment to
be passed by the General Assembly for two successive years before
going to voters, the earliest a new version could possibly be
implemented would be the fall of 2024. For now, former felons seeking
to regain their voting rights will have to rely on Youngkin, who has
yet to state his position on the proposed amendment.

_BENJAMIN BARBER
[[link removed]] is the
Democracy Program Coordinator at the Institute for Southern Studies, a
contributing writer for Facing South, and a graduate of the School of
Social Policy & Practice at the University of Pennsylvania. He also
holds a bachelor's degree in history from Barton College in Wilson,
North Carolina. Benjamin previously interned with the Equal Justice
Initiative in Alabama and with Facing South, and he served as the
historian for the North Carolina NAACP Youth and College Division. His
research focuses on voting rights, democracy, and Southern history._

_COMMON DREAMS [[link removed]]_

_Our mission.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good._

_Who we are.
Common Dreams is a reader-supported independent news outlet created in
1997 as a new media model._

_Our nonprofit newsroom covers the most important news stories of the
moment. Common Dreams free online journalism keeps our millions of
readers well-informed, inspired, and engaged._

_We are optimists. We believe real change is possible. But only if
enough well-informed, well-intentioned—and just plain fed up and
fired-up—people demand it. We believe that together we can attain
our common dreams._

_What we value.
We share our readers' progressive values of social justice, human
rights, equality, and peace. Common Dreams is committed to not only
being your trusted news source but to encouraging critical thinking
and civic action on a diverse range of social, economic, and civil
rights issues affecting individuals and their communities._

_What we do.
The Common Dreams news team is dedicated to providing independent
reporting to uncover and publish honest, independent news and
information that you can rely on. Every day._

_We publish a diverse mix of breaking news, insightful views, videos,
and press releases covering issues that matter to progressives in
every corner of the globe. We compile it all in one easy-to-access
online location and present it in a clean, uncomplicated format,
uninterrupted by pop-ups, advertising, or gimmicks._

_Common Dreams makes sure that the critical issues of today and
inspiring ideas for the future are not ignored, providing an
alternative to the commercial media._

_Editorial independence.
Common Dreams maintains an editorial independence our readers can
count on. Our people-powered model is simple: we rely on our readers.
And to ensure our independence, we accept no corporate or governmental
funding or advertisements of any kind. For over two decades, we've
pooled together hundreds of thousands of small donations to keep us
moving forward. Those donations in no way influence our editorial
principles and judgment._

_Our community.
We are hundreds of thousands strong. We are writers. Activists.
Everyday citizens._

_Our readers are a robust and vibrant community of thinkers and doers
who believe a better world is possible._

_Common Dreams is a genuinely people-powered and reader-funded news
outlet that exists to inform and inspire those fighting worldwide for
a better future._

* voting rights
[[link removed]]
* Elections
[[link removed]]
* disenfranchisement
[[link removed]]
* democracy
[[link removed]]
* formerly incarcerated
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]