|
The below back and forth between various branches of government and citizens shows how deep-rooted felon disenfranchisement is in our society. Proponents of felon disenfranchisement in America uphold the practice by saying that it prevents election fraud and future crimes, the moral compass of elections, it’s a state’s right to withhold the right to vote due to criminal activity, and that if someone commits a felony, then losing their right to vote is another means of punishment on the offender. Opponents to felon disenfranchisement, including the disenfranchised themselves, say that once someone is released from prison, they have paid their debt to society, and as part of the process of reintegrating ex-offenders into society, they should be allowed the right to vote. If an individual is able to be back in society, raise their families, and work jobs, thereby paying taxes back into their community- they should be allowed to vote about the laws they live under. If not, then there is a group of over 6 million people in the United States of America who pay taxes, but get no representation, and are in effect, made to be second class citizens.
⮚ Maryland
In March, 2016, the Maryland legislature overrode Governor Larry Hogan’s veto and revised Maryland law to restore voting rights upon release from prison, thus making 40,000 Marylanders eligible to vote.
“Felony Disenfranchisement has been a part of Maryland’s Constitution since 1851.” “After a successful veto override, voting rights in Maryland are restored automatically after release from prison, and not taken away from those on probation. This law went into effect on March 10, 2016. With a vote in the House on January 21 [2016] and another in the Senate on February 9 [2016], Maryland’s legislature voted to override Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto and enact SB 340/HB 980. When this legislation became law on March 10 [2016], it immediately restored voting rights to an estimated 40,000 Marylanders. This new legislation replaced Maryland’s previous practice of disenfranchising individuals with past felony convictions until they completed each and every portion of their sentences. Going forward, citizens will regain their voting rights immediately upon release from incarceration, and will not lose their right to vote if not sentenced to incarceration.”
In February 2022, from a Washington Post article, “Maryland’s Democratic controlled legislature is poised to reform one of the country’s most restrictive laws barring ex-offenders from serving on juries, building on a commitment to restore rights to the formerly incarcerated that began seven years ago…As the nation reckons with systemic racism and racial disparities, advocates and lawmakers say they are hopeful that this is the year that Maryland will take the next step to make formerly incarcerated people whole…With a disproportionate number of Black men in Maryland’s prisons, advocates are hoping the bill will help widen the jury pool and lead to fairer trials…More than 20 million people across the country — a disproportionate number of whom are Black men — are disqualified for jury duty because of a prior conviction, according to a 2021 report by the Prison Policy Initiative, a research and criminal justice advocacy group. Criminal justice experts say Maryland’s current law is one of the most restrictive in the country because it not only excludes people who have been convicted of felonies but also those who have been convicted of some misdemeanors as well. Under the law, a person is barred from jury service if they have been convicted of a crime that carries a sentence of more than a year and the person has served a year in jail. A person who has a pending charge for a crime that carries a sentence of more than a year is also prohibited from serving. An ex-offender can only regain the ability to serve on a jury if they receive a pardon.
“According to a recent report by Maryland legislative analysts, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, similar to Maryland, determine eligibility for juror service based on the length of a sentence someone receives and whether the offense is a felony or misdemeanor. There are only three states, Illinois, Iowa and Maine, that do not automatically disqualify jurors based on a prior felony conviction.
“‘If a guy came out and he’s off parole, he’s off probation, he’s working paying taxes, he should have the same rights as everybody else,’ said Stanley Mitchell, 73. Mitchell was one of nearly 200 older people released from prison after a 2012 landmark decision by Maryland’s highest court determined that juries before the 1980s were regularly given bad instructions, resulting in unfair trials. Mitchell walked out of Jessup prison nine years ago with $18 and a 30-day supply of high blood pressure pills in his pocket. He’s rebuilt his life and, as a result of the 2015 voting bill, he cast his first ballot in 2018…
“In Maryland, more than 70 percent of the prison population in 2018 was Black, compared with 31 percent of the state population. Sen. Jill P. Carter (D-Baltimore City), who sponsored the Senate version of the bill, said the measure serves two purposes: to ensure that Black defendants ‘have a jury of their peers’ and to re-enfranchise people who have paid their debt to society.
“The legislation is the latest effort in Maryland in recent years to level the criminal justice playing field and help ex-offenders become full members of society. In 2018, state lawmakers overturned Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto of a bill that prohibits public and private colleges and universities from including questions about criminal history on student applications. Two years ago, the Democratic-controlled legislature approved an override of another ban-the-box legislation, one that bars employers from asking prospective employees about their criminal history on a job application.”
⮚ Texas and Tennessee
It is a daunting struggle to restore the right to vote for those who have been formerly incarcerated or who otherwise have felony records. For example, look at the severe and disproportionately harsh punishments pursued in two separate states, Texas and Tennessee, against African-American women with felony records for mistakenly attempting to participate in the electoral process. Given the “slap-on-the-wrist” treatment granted to many White voters who have purposefully attempted to wrongfully vote, clearly the prosecutorial power is being deployed to target Black voters. Indeed, in the Pamela Moses case, the prosecutorial misconduct and withholding exculpatory evidence exemplifies the overreach to punish and discourage those formerly incarcerated from voting. In the Crystal Mason case, the Court recently acknowledged the need to show intent. At the core of our discussion is the vital need to eliminate felon disenfranchisement laws in the U.S.
Indeed, some 6 million citizens are outright blocked from voting by disenfranchising laws that impede their ability to restore their right to vote following incarceration or bar voting until the completion of parole, probation, sentencing, and/or the repayment of restitution and fees. The estimated that 18 million more persons formerly incarcerated who are actually eligible to vote in their states do not register to vote based on confusion regarding their rights and fear of reincarceration should they mistakenly vote. That fear is well-founded and proven voter suppression tactic.
On April 22, 2022, “a Tennessee prosecutor dropped all criminal charges…against Pamela Moses, a Memphis woman with a previous felony conviction who was sentenced to six years and one day in prison in January after she tried to restore her right to vote in 2019. The voter fraud conviction from her trial was thrown out in February after a judge ruled that the Tennessee Department of Correction had improperly withheld evidence that was later uncovered by The Guardian…But Ms. Moses will no longer face a second trial ‘in the interest of judicial economy,’ Amy Weirich, the district attorney of Shelby County at the time, said in a statement. Ms. Moses spent 82 days in custody on this case, ‘which is sufficient,’ Ms. Weirich said. Ms. Moses is also permanently barred from registering to vote or voting in Tennessee.”. (NY Times, “Charges Dropped Against Tennessee Woman Who Was Jailed Over Voter Fraud”, 1 – 3 Para., 2022)
On May 11, 2022, “[t]he Texas Court of Criminal Appeals [told] a lower appeals court to take another look at the controversial illegal voting conviction of Crystal Mason, who was given a five-year prison sentence for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election while she was on supervised release for a federal conviction. The state’s court of last resort for criminal matters…ruled a lower appeals court had wrongly upheld Mason’s conviction by concluding that it was ‘irrelevant’ to Mason’s prosecution that she did not know she was ineligible to cast a ballot. The ruling opens the door for Mason’s conviction to ultimately be overturned”. (The Texas Tribune, “Crystal Mason’s contentious illegal voting conviction must be reconsidered, criminal appeals court says”, 1 -2 Para., 2022)
The Transformative Justice Coalition (TJC) has followed these cases, highlighted developments, and urged their supporters to lift up support for Pamela throughout this battle. TJC is undertaking a major nationwide voter restoration initiative for the next several years and building a spirit of perseverance and justice fighting voter suppression efforts that target formerly incarcerated persons and all voters. TJC Co-Leaders and Radio Hosts Attorneys Arnwine and Jones launched a nationwide TJC Voter Engagement and Restoration Program to assist in this national fight to automatically restore the right to vote.
For those who have had a past felony conviction, for information on their voting rights, please visit:
⮚ Florida
From the Brennan Center’s “Voting Rights Restoration Efforts in Florida: A summary of current felony disenfranchisement policies and legislative advocacy in Florida”, updated on February 14th, 2023:
“In November 2018, nearly 65 percent of Florida voters approved Amendment 4, a constitutional amendment that automatically restored voting rights to most Floridians with past convictions who had completed the terms of their sentence. Shortly thereafter, in June 2019, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill 7066 into law, prohibiting returning citizens from voting unless they pay off certain legal financial obligations (LFOs) imposed by a court pursuant to a felony conviction.
“The Brennan Center and other civil and voting rights groups filed a lawsuit challenging the law. The trial court found Florida’s “pay-to-vote system” unconstitutional, in part because it is often not possible to determine whether a returning citizen is eligible to vote because the State does not reliably or consistently track data on LFOs. However, the en banc Eleventh reversed and vacated the lower court’s ruling. More information about this lawsuit can be found here.
“On August 8, 2022, following reports of a state attorney in Alachua County prosecuting 10 returning citizens for allegedly registering and voting in 2020 while ineligible because of outstanding LFOs, the Brennan Center, ACLU of Florida, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and ACLU created a resource for lawyers and advocacy groups to help returning citizens determine if they are eligible to vote. Please note this resource is not intended for the general public and should not be relied upon as legal advice. It should be used in consultation with a lawyer or another expert who is able to interpret Florida’s voting rules, and it is intended to serve as a starting point for assisting a returning citizen with determining whether they are eligible to register and vote.
On August 8, 2022, following reports of a state attorney in Alachua County prosecuting 10 returning citizens for allegedly registering and voting in 2020 while ineligible because of outstanding LFOs, the Brennan Center, ACLU of Florida, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and ACLU created a resource for lawyers and advocacy groups to help returning citizens determine if they are eligible to vote. Please note this resource is not intended for the general public and should not be relied upon as legal advice. It should be used in consultation with a lawyer or another expert who is able to interpret Florida’s voting rules, and it is intended to serve as a starting point for assisting a returning citizen with determining whether they are eligible to register and vote.
On January 13, following the arrests of dozens of returning citizens for what appear to be honest mistakes about their eligibility to vote, the Brennan Center, ACLU of Florida, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, ACLU, Florida NAACP, and League of Women Voters of Florida sent a letter to Secretary of State Cord Byrd putting him on notice that Florida’s voter registration form violates the National Voter Registration Act because it fails to adequately inform applicants with felony convictions of the eligibility requirements.
On February 3, Florida lawmakers introduced H.B. 3-B/S.B. 4-B, a bill to expand the jurisdiction of the office of statewide prosecution (“OSP”) to investigate and prosecute certain crimes related to voting, petition activities, and voter registration. The bill was introduced after several Florida courts dismissed the OSP’s charges against three of the 20 returning citizens arrested by DeSantis’s election police force last August. The courts concluded that the OSP does not have authority to prosecute alleged voting misconduct that occurred in only one judicial circuit. The Brennan Center, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, ACLU of Florida, ACLU, Florida NAACP, League of Women Voters of Florida, LatinoJustice, All Voting is Local Florida, and Common Cause Florida submitted written testimony in opposition to the bill. S.B. 4-B was sent to Gov. DeSantis for his signature on February 10.
The History of Amendment 4
“Prior to Amendment 4, Florida’s constitution permanently disenfranchised all citizens who had been convicted of any felony offense unless the Clemency Board restored their voting rights – a process that will now apply to those who have not had their rights restored by Amendment 4, including anyone convicted of murder or felony sexual offenses. Between 2010 and 2016, the number of disenfranchised Floridians grew by nearly 150,000 to an estimated total of 1,686,000. In 2016, more than one in five of Florida’s Black voting-age population was disenfranchised.
“After years of advocating for change with the courts and governors’ offices, the Brennan Center joined with the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition and others to draft Amendment 4 and push for its inclusion on the 2018 ballot.
“On January 23, 2018, Floridians for a Fair Democracy announced that their campaign, Florida Second Chances, had surpassed the 766,200 signature threshold to get Amendment 4 on the 2018 ballot.
For the next 10 months, the campaign worked to build a massive groundswell of bipartisan support that culminated in the Amendment’s passage on November 6, 2018. Amendment 4 went into effect on January 8, 2019.
Litigation
“In 2000, the Brennan Center and co-counsel, representing more than 600,000 citizens, filed a lawsuit – Johnson v. Bush – challenging Florida’s permanent disenfranchisement constitutional provision under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In 2005, despite evidence that Florida’s constitutional provision was rooted in 19th-century efforts to evade the mandate of the Fifteenth Amendment and deny Black men the right to vote, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the law to stand.
Executive Actions
“In April 2007, then-Gov. Charlie Crist took an incremental step towards reform when he issued revised rules of executive clemency. Notably, this change created automatic rights restoration for people completing sentences for certain felony convictions. A year later, in 2008, Gov. Crist’s office announced that over 115,000 Floridians had regained voting rights since the new rules were implemented.
“In March 2011, then-Gov. Rick Scott eliminated Gov. Crist’s reforms and created additional barriers for people seeking to have their voting rights restored. The Brennan Center and other national civil rights organizations strongly opposed the plan in a joint letter to the Clemency Board. The American Probation and Parole Association also submitted its own letter encouraging the Board to maintain Gov. Crist’s clemency reforms. The Governor’s regressive move set the stage for the effort to ultimately pass Amendment 4 years later.”
On February 17th, 2023, The Florida Rights Restoration Coalition (FRCC), the main group that was organizing in Florida for Amendment 4, was nominated for the the Nobel Peace Prize.
” ‘We want to take advantage of this opportunity to really highlight the power of second chances, right?’ said Desmond Meade, executive director of the FRRC. ‘That even though people like me have made mistakes in the past, that there is still an opportunity for us to be contributing members of society.’
“Since Amendment 4, the FRRC has continued its mission by helping eligible felons pay any fees to get their rights restored, as required by the Florida Legislature.
“It has also helped the community in other ways, including by providing personal protection equipment during the pandemic.
“Meade and group deputy director Neil Volz said this was validation at the highest levels that the work they are doing is important.
” ‘Here we have a prestigious organization saying, ‘Hey, we see you, We see you for who you are, not this narrative that exists about what people may think you are,’ Volz said. ‘We’re talking about acknowledgment that returning citizens can be heroes of democracy here in our state and can give back and help transform our society in a way that benefits everybody, that’s really empowering for our particular community.’
“FRRC was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by the American Friends Service Committee, the same organization that nominated Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for the Nobel.”
On the FRRC’s website, they state: “For many returning citizens, voting is a step in a restorative journey. The state of Florida led many of these citizens to believe that they could exercise their right to vote, and then it arrested, jailed and charged them in front of their friends, families and neighbors. Voter integrity starts at the front end of our election process. We’ve created Bail and Legal Defense Funds to help financially challenged returning citizens who’ve been unjustly arrested for voting. We have also launched a Change.org petition to demand that the state immediately stop arrests of returning citizens, who have expressed that the state led them to believe they are eligible to vote and to create a centralized voter eligibility database to verify all voters by the end of 2023.”
|
