The Attorney General is among those pushing for abolition of ex-felon disenfranchisement laws.
A person makes a big mistake, gets convicted of a felony, and spends time in prison. Upon release, we often say that such people have “paid their debt to society.” However, one key aspect of a return to society is never reopened to an ex-felon in many states: the right to vote. The right to vote is a fundamental right under the U.S. Constitution, but can be forever lost by a single felony conviction. Civil rights groups and now the Attorney General of the U.S. have questioned the fairness and wisdom of the disenfranchisement of ex-convicts.
History of Voting-Right Deprivation for Ex-Felons
During the Jim Crow era following the Civil War and Reconstruction, several former Confederate states enacted measures designed to maintain the inferior legal status of African-Americans. Among those laws were the original statutes denying those convicted of felonies the right to vote. The states to enact such statutes arrested and prosecuted African-Americans at a disproportionately high rate—the result was the effective sealing of the ballot box on the basis of race. Eventually, the prevalent “law and order/tough on crime” policies of the late 20th Century would spur other states to enact similar disenfranchisement laws.
Several states currently bar ex-felons from voting at any time after a conviction. Yet Maine and Vermont allow even prison inmates to vote, while most of the remaining states restore voting rights to people convicted of felonies after completion of prison sentences and, in some states, parole.
Discriminatory Impact
Some would say that the insidious goal of those who enacted the relevant laws during the Jim Crow era has been achieved: Almost six million U.S. citizens, including 13% of African-American men, have lost the right to vote for life as a result of a felony conviction, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The Brennan Center predicts that, if the disproportionate rate of conviction of African-American men continues, a third of such men in this generation may lose the right to vote.
For this and other reasons, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has called on states to repeal ex-felon disenfranchisement laws.
Counterproductive Results
Attorney General Holder relied upon a 2011 Florida study that found an 11% recidivism rate for ex-felons whose right to vote was reinstated, as compared with 33% for ex-felons in general. (See “States should lift life bans on voting for ex-felons: Attorney General,” Reuters.) Holder noted that denial of voting rights increases ex-convicts’ sense of stigma and isolation, which can in turn lead to a return to criminal conduct. The effects can be particularly dire considering that three-strikes laws and the War on Drugs have resulted in felony convictions for many people who have committed relatively small-time crimes.
Holder’s message embodies the principle that voting is a civic duty, as well as a right, and that voting is one of the most direct and accessible means by which citizens participate in a democratic society. To deny this right is to convey to the disenfranchised that they are not fully part of the community.
Cheerleading, Not Litigating
Although Holder spoke passionately in favor of repeal of state ex-felon disenfranchisement statutes, he didn’t go so far as to threaten to sue states who insist on maintaining such laws. Indeed, the Justice Department could take legal action in response to denial of ex-felons’ voting rights, as it has in response to voter I.D. laws in North Carolina and Texas. For the present, however, the Attorney General is relying on a softer approach. But that could change if public pressure mounts in response to campaigns by the ACLU, the Brennan Center for Justice, and other civil rights groups.
Democracy Restoration Act
In 2011, Representative John Conyers introduced the Democracy Restoration Act, which would have restored voting rights to ex-felons in federal elections. The bill “died” in committee (no action was taken on it by the House of Representatives during the session and it was sent to committee). It was reintroduced in 2012, but Congress didn’t enact it. The ACLU and other organizations still support the bill and it may yet be reintroduced.
Just the Beginning
Attorney General Holder’s strong statement in support of repeal of ex-felon disenfranchisement laws is potentially a start to a gradual change in state laws. As we have seen, though, public policy issues can “catch fire” and change can come in a sudden spurt. Or, it can take years. Check this site for updates as this issue evolves
Posted on Vahe GTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr. Morales is really tough attorney and strong man. He never afraid of difficult cases and always fights like a knight. If you have some trouble in California, Mr. Morales' law firm really can help you.Posted on Jessy ATrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Chris Morales was very professional and kind. He made sure I understood every step and always took the time to answer my questions. I really appreciated his honesty and calm approach. I’m truly grateful for his help and would recommend him without hesitation.Posted on Jasmine STrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. I really appreciate Christopher Morales for his professionalism and for taking the time to fully explain the answers to my questions. There's a lot that can be answered through his website, which I appreciate as well.Posted on Nazera FTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr. Morales is a very eloquent speaker with a great knowledge of the law and related matters. After I asked a few questions, he was able to answer them clearly and I felt supported by someone who had expertise in this field. I feel that he is passionate about his work and leads with that when representing his clients. I highly recommend getting in touch with him if you have questions or need support regarding criminal law.Posted on Shawn STrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. I've had some interaction with Mr. Morales directly as I was doing research on his law firm and him specifically. He took the time to answer my questions thoughtfully and with candor. I was left with a very strong impression about his skills as an attorney and how he can best help his clients. I also asked a couple of indirect questions to get a sense of his views on law, policy, and society and was impressed with his answers and was left with a highly favorable view of the man. I would definitely be considering him and his firm for services that I need.Posted on Yen NTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr. Morales is highly professional, friendly, and takes time to answer questions patiently.Posted on Rebekah sTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr. Morales was prompt and informative with answering my questions. He gave me detailed information and left it open to ask more if needed.Posted on RenatoTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Christopher Morales' most valuable trait is his straightforward honesty. He doesn't just tell you what you want to hear. Instead, he provides with a realistic legal perspective grounded in deep knowledge, ensuring you are well informed. I was also impressed how his firm leverages modern technology which makes the entire legal process more efficient, thus more affordable. For anyone needing a highly competent, modern, and direct attorney, I strongly recommend Christopher Morales.Posted on Claire MTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr Morales shows a great level of professionalism in his conversations and is approachable in personality. He was able to answer any questions I had and it was great to see his experience and knowledge reflected in the law firm website. I'm glad to have learned about his services.Posted on Karl bTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. Mr. Morales was very knowledgeable and has answered all of my questions. Additionally, the website was full of very important information. I will be saving this website for future use. I am glad to have a place where I can run to if ever I need guidance with the law.