A huge class action lawsuit was recently filed in federal court in New Orleans. Voice of the Experienced (VOTE) is requesting voting rights for formerly incarcerated individuals in the state. Although the lawsuit names a few specific plaintiffs, VOTE is asking that the suit be class action certified to include the estimated 70,000 people in the state who are currently on parole or probation and who don’t have the right to vote until their sentence is served. If you live in Louisiana, 70,000 votes could easily change the upcoming election. Because most states have restrictions that limit voting for ex-offenders, you may be affected more than you think by felony disenfranchisement.
Isn’t It Constitutional?
To understand why offenders don’t have the right to vote, you almost have to go back to ancient times in Greece and Rome. When a crime was committed, part of the punishment was a “civil death.” Criminals lost their right to be part of the community. This attitude carried forward into the roots of building America, when criminals, slaves and women were disenfranchised. Although most citizens finally gained voting rights, felony disenfranchisement has been held to be constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld felony disenfranchisement statutes in 1974 in Richardson v. Ramirez, citing Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Essentially, the representation of the state can be reduced “for participation in rebellion, or other crime,” which the Court found amounted to an affirmative sanction of the practice by the founders.
States have their own rules for giving formerly incarcerated persons voting rights. Maine and Vermont actually allow individuals who are incarcerated to vote, via absentee ballot. In some states, voting rights return when the incarceration is complete, while most states require that parole or probation be completed before the individual can vote again. In a few states, an individual must “jump through hoops,” like getting a pardon or permission from the parole board or court, to restore his or her voting rights. It can be quite confusing to someone who understands the law, let alone individuals who may have limited education.
Why Should We Care?
In 2015, President Barack Obama said, “Yes, we should be fighting back against laws, for example, that say ex-felons, no matter how long they’ve been living a correct life, no matter how well they’ve paid their dues, that they can never vote again in that state.” Eric H. Holder, JD, US Attorney General, concurs. Holder estimates that about 5.8 million people in our country are prohibited from voting because of felony disenfranchisement laws.
Denying felons and ex-offenders the right to vote might be constitutional, but it’s not good for the community, according to VOTE. One key component to reducing recidivism is getting the individual back into society. Many ex-offenders are tax-paying citizens who have changed their lives for the better, but they don’t have the right to be involved in the voting process. Does this seem right?
Another key reason we should be concerned about voting rights is that it becomes a generational issue. Studies show that children of ex-offenders who don’t vote grow up to be non-voters. Unlike their parents, these children have the right to vote but don’t know how to exercise that right or don’t see the importance of being connected to the voting process.
Legislators may be concerned about changing the electorate by enacting new laws that provide voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals, but voting is a civil right. Sure, it may be correct to take away voting rights while someone is paying a debt to society. When that debt is paid, voting rights should be returned. Many of today’s crimes don’t warrant the loss of civil rights for the rest of someone’s life. We should be concerned about felony disenfranchisement, because it affects all of us in one way or another.