Rights Restoration

Last updated

Rights restoration is the process of restoring voting rights to people with prior felony convictions who lost their voting rights under felony disenfranchisement. It may also refer to additional civil rights that are taken away upon conviction, such as holding public office and serving on a jury.

Contents

In the United States, the voting rights of people convicted of a felony vary from state to state. In most states, the right to vote is automatically or eventually restored upon the completion of the sentence. In three states – Florida, Kentucky and Iowa – all individuals convicted of felonies lose their voting rights permanently, and they must directly petition the government to get them back. Critics of these voting prohibitions argue that voting is an unalienable right and should not be taken away from citizens who have finished their prison terms.

Background

Compared to other nations, the United States is very strict with regard to denying the right to vote to people with prior felony convictions. [1] Under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, states are able to make their own rules on restricting the right to vote based on criminal convictions.

It is estimated that there are 5.85 million people in the United States who cannot vote due to felony convictions, [2] including 2.6 million who have completed their sentences but are disenfranchised in states with the most restrictive policies. [3] This accounts for approximately 2.5% of the eligible voter population, and almost 8% of the African-American eligible voter population. [4]

Felony disenfranchisement by state

See “Felony Disenfranchisement, Contemporary Practice By Country, United States

Advocacy for rights restoration

Several groups in the U.S. are active in the movement to restore voting rights to people with prior felony convictions, including the American Civil Liberties Union, FairVote, Prison Policy Initiative, Advancement Project, Florida Rights Restoration Coalition, and The Sentencing Project.

Among these groups and others, core reasons for ending felony disenfranchisement and restoring voting rights to people with prior felony convictions include:

Felony disenfranchisement is used to suppress the African-American vote

Although it has existed since colonial times, voter disenfranchisement boomed after the Civil War. Afraid of large black populations finally being able to vote, Southern states looked for ways to penalize African-American citizens and deny them the vote, both through Jim Crow laws and felony disenfranchisement. [5]

Racial disparities

Due to racial disparities in the U.S. prison system, African Americans and Latinos are overrepresented in the incarcerated population. Thus, more African Americans and Latinos are often subject to felony disenfranchisement. While African Americans are only 13 percent of U.S. population, they make up 38 percent of the prison population. Latinos account for about 15 percent of the U.S. population and make up 20 percent of Americans in prison. [6]

It is estimated that one out of every 13 African Americans is unable to vote due to prior felony convictions in states where felony disenfranchisement is prevalent. [7]

Repatriation

Those in support of rights restoration argue that, once someone has completed prison time or other punishments, their punishment should end. That should also include the ending of voting restrictions. Advocates contend that this is crucial for people with prior felony convictions to fully reintegrate back into society.

"Once a citizen has done time and repaid his or her debt to society, they should not be deprived of their fundamental right to vote," said Judith Browne-Dianis, co-director of Advancement Project. [8]

Studies have shown that former incarcerated people who are able to vote, find work and educate themselves are less likely to reoffend and return to the penal system. [9]

2014 changes in rights restoration

In 2014, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe removed all drug charges from the commonwealth's list of “violent” felony offenses, making more people eligible for Virginia's automatic voting rights restoration process for people with non-violent felony convictions. [10]

In 2014, Attorney General Eric Holder called for voting rights to be restored to people with prior felony convictions at a speech at Georgetown University. [11] Holder said, “It is time to fundamentally reconsider laws that permanently disenfranchise people who are no longer under federal or state supervision.”

Related Research Articles

A felony is traditionally considered a crime of high seriousness, whereas a misdemeanour is regarded as less serious. The term "felony" originated from English common law to describe an offense that resulted in the confiscation of a convicted person's land and goods, to which additional punishments including capital punishment could be added; other crimes were called misdemeanors. Following conviction of a felony in a court of law, a person may be described as a felon or a convicted felon.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Sentencing Project</span>

The Sentencing Project is a Washington, D.C.-based research and advocacy center working for decarceration in the United States and seeking to address racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The organization produces nonpartisan reports and research for use by state and federal policymakers, administrators, and journalists.

Disfranchisement, also called disenfranchisement, or voter disqualification is the restriction of suffrage of a person or group of people, or a practice that has the effect of preventing a person exercising the right to vote. Disfranchisement can also refer to the revocation of power or control of a particular individual, community or being to the natural amenity they have; that is to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, of some privilege or inherent immunity. Disfranchisement may be accomplished explicitly by law or implicitly through requirements applied in a discriminatory fashion, through intimidation, or by placing unreasonable requirements on voters for registration or voting. High barriers to entry to the political competition can disenfranchise political movements.

Civil death is the loss of all or almost all civil rights by a person due to a conviction for a felony or due to an act by the government of a country that results in the loss of civil rights. It is usually inflicted on persons convicted of crimes against the state or adults determined by a court to be legally incompetent because of mental disability.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voting rights in the United States</span> Suffrage in American elections

Voting rights in the United States, specifically the enfranchisement and disenfranchisement of different groups, has been a moral and political issue throughout United States history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Florida Central Voter File</span>

The Florida Central Voter File was an internal list of legally eligible voters used by the US Florida Department of State Division of Elections to monitor the official voter lists maintained by the 67 county governments in the State of Florida between 1998 and January 1, 2006. The exclusion of eligible voters from the file was a central part of the controversy surrounding the US presidential elections in 2000, which hinged on results in Florida. The 'Florida Central Voter File' was replaced by the Florida Voter Registration System on January 1, 2006, when a new federal law, the Help America Vote Act, came into effect.

<i>Muntaqim v. Coombe</i> American legal case

Muntaqim v. Coombe, 449 F.3d 371, was a legal challenge to New York State’s law disenfranchising individuals convicted of felonies while in prison and on parole. The plaintiff, Jalil Abdul Muntaqim who is serving a life sentence, argues that the law has a disproportionate impact on African Americans and therefore violates Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act as a denial of the right to vote on account of race.

<i>Hayden v. Pataki</i> American legal case

Hayden v. Pataki, 449 F.3d 305, was a legal challenge to New York State's law disenfranchising individuals convicted of felonies while in prison and on parole. New York State is one of the 47 states to prohibit citizens from voting while in prison.

Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that convicted felons could be barred from voting without violating the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Such felony disenfranchisement is practiced in a number of states.

Loss of rights due to criminal conviction refers to the practice in some countries of reducing the rights of individuals who have been convicted of a criminal offence. The restrictions are in addition to other penalties such as incarceration or fines. In addition to restrictions imposed directly upon conviction, there can also be collateral civil consequences resulting from a criminal conviction, but which are not imposed directly by the courts as a result of the conviction.

Employment discrimination against persons with criminal records in the United States has been illegal since enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Employers retain the right to lawfully consider an applicant's or employee's criminal conviction(s) for employment purposes e.g., hiring, retention, promotion, benefits, and delegated duties.

Transgender disenfranchisement is the prevention by bureaucratic, institutional and social barriers, of transgender individuals from voting or participating in other aspects of civic life. Transgender people may be disenfranchised if the sex indicated on their identification documents does not match their gender presentation, and they may be unable to update necessary identity documents because some governments require individuals to undergo sex reassignment surgery first, which many cannot afford, are not medical candidates for, or do not want.

Penda D. Hair is an American lawyer. She is the Legal Director of Forward Justice, a law, policy, and strategy center dedicated to advancing racial, social, and economic justice in the U.S. South. A frequent television and radio commentator, she speaks regularly on issues of race and democracy. Previously, she was a founding co-director of the civil rights group Advancement Project.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Felony disenfranchisement in the United States</span> Prohibiting criminals from voting in elections in the United States

Felony disenfranchisement in the United States is the suspension or withdrawal of voting rights due to the conviction of a criminal offense. The actual class of crimes that results in disenfranchisement vary between jurisdictions, but most commonly classed as felonies, or may be based on a certain period of incarceration or other penalty. In some jurisdictions disfranchisement is permanent, while in others suffrage is restored after a person has served a sentence, or completed parole or probation. Felony disenfranchisement is one among the collateral consequences of criminal conviction and the loss of rights due to conviction for criminal offense. In 2016, 6.1 million individuals were disenfranchised on account of a conviction, 2.47% of voting-age citizens. As of October 2020, it was estimated that 5.1 million voting-age US citizens were disenfranchised for the 2020 presidential election on account of a felony conviction, 1 in 44 citizens. As suffrage rights are generally bestowed by state law, state felony disenfranchisement laws also apply to elections to federal offices.

This is a timeline of voting rights in the United States. The timeline highlights milestones when groups of people in the United States gained voting rights, and also documents aspects of disenfranchisement in the country.

Felony disenfranchisement in Virginia is a provision of the Virginia Constitution: "No person who has been convicted of a felony shall be qualified to vote unless his civil rights have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority".

Felony disenfranchisement in Florida is currently a contentious political issue in Florida. Though the general principle of felony disenfranchisement is not in dispute, the disenfranchisement of people who had been convicted of a felony and have served their sentence — that includes prison, bail and parole — but continue being barred from voting if they have outstanding fines, fees or restitution obligations is in contention. Prior to January 8, 2019, when Amendment 4 came into effect, people convicted of a felony effectively lost their right to vote for life, as it could only be restored by the governor as an act of clemency, which rarely occurred. Florida was one of four states with a lifetime ban, the others being Iowa, Kentucky and Virginia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 Florida Amendment 4</span> 2018 amendment to the Constitution of Florida

Florida Amendment 4, also the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative, is an amendment to the Constitution of Florida passed by ballot initiative on November 6, 2018, as part of the 2018 Florida elections. The proposition restored the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation. The amendment does not apply to Floridians convicted of murder or sexual offenses.

Desmond Meade is a voting rights activist and Executive Director of the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition. As chair of Floridians for a Fair Democracy, Meade led the successful effort to pass Florida Amendment 4, a 2018 state initiative that restored voting rights to over 1.4 million Floridians with previous felony convictions. In April 2019, Time magazine named Meade as one of the 100 most influential people in the world. Meade's autobiography Let My People Vote: My Battle to Restore the Civil Rights of Returning Citizens was published in 2020; in 2021 he was awarded a MacArthur "Genius Grant."

Demetrius Jifunza is an American Christian Methodist Episcopal pastor and activist who is among the most visible spokespersons and leaders in the felony disenfranchisement, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative.

References