Disenfranchise

Upcoming Bill Could Make Illinois the Third State to Allow All Incarcerated People to Vote

Election Law Society · January 28, 2022 ·

By: Andrew Heiser

Brian Harrington spent thirteen years in prison after being charged with murder at the age of sixteen. During that time, he was able to build skills he hoped to use outside of prison, work on self-improvement, and raise awareness about the shortcomings of the criminal justice system. There was, however, one thing he could not do: vote.

In Illinois, as in almost every state, incarcerated felons lose their right to vote while they are incarcerated (though unlike some states, in Illinois the right to vote is restored immediately upon release). Only two states, Maine and Vermont, and the District of Columbia currently allow all people in prison to vote during their incarceration. Alabama, Alaska, and Mississippi also allow some prisoners to vote if they were not convicted of certain crimes—though which crimes specifically cause those with felony convictions to lose the right to vote can seem arbitrary, and many are not made aware of the distinction.

Reformation or Regression? Michigan Election Laws Divide Opinions

Election Law Society · January 24, 2022 ·

In June of this year, a series of three election reform bills passed both houses of the Michigan state legislature. Republicans comprise the majority in each house of the legislature, and all three bills were passed on party-line votes with all Republicans in favor and all Democrats opposed. The first of the three bills, SB 285, would impose new voter I.D. requirements on absentee voters. It would require voters to provide a photocopy of their I.D. (among other forms of acceptable identification) with their mailed application or present I.D. to the officials at the county clerk’s office when applying in person. Any voter who did not do so would be mailed a provisional ballot and be required to prove their identity before their vote could be counted.

Virginia Takes Initial Steps to Permanently Streamline the Restoration of Voting Rights for Virginians with Felony Conviction Histories

Election Law Society · October 20, 2021 ·

By: Sarah Fisher

Earlier this year, the Virginia General Assembly took a significant initial step toward ensuring that Virginians with felony conviction histories have their voting rights restored upon release from incarceration.

Currently, under the Constitution of Virginia, Virginians with prior felony convictions are permanently disenfranchised and may only have their civil rights restored at the discretion of the Governor upon full completion of their sentences. This policy has historically been interpreted as requiring the payment of all court costs and fees, as well as the successful completion of applicable probation or parole periods. State policy also required would-be voters to affirmatively request restoration of their rights via an application to the Governor and Secretary of the Commonwealth. While Virginia’s gubernatorial administrations now work proactively to restore voting rights to all who are eligible (therefore eliminating the application stage), new voters are often unaware their voting rights have been revived.

Wisconsin: After Frank v. Walker

Election Law Society · April 20, 2016 ·

Wisconsin: after Frank v. Walker, a new case — One Wisconsin Institute v. Nichol — was filed on May 29^th, 2015 to challenge Wisconsin’s election laws again.

By: Lisa Zhang

In a recent complaint filed by One Wisconsin Institute, Citizen Action of Wisconsin Education Fund, and six Wisconsin residents, plaintiffs challenged several Wisconsin voting provisions, including 2011 Wisconsin Act 23. I previously discussed the Equal Protection challenges made in this case in an earlier post. Below is an analysis of the case’s challenge under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

Alaska Natives Afforded Voting Rights

Election Law Society · February 10, 2016 ·

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was one of the single greatest accomplishments of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. The act bans racial discrimination in voting practices by all levels of government, and was enacted with the specific purpose of enfranchising millions of African-Americans in the South and Latinos in the Southwest, as well as those who had been shut out of the voting process because of their lack of English fluency. Due to its overwhelming success, the Voting Rights Act is often considered the “most effective civil rights law ever enacted.” Although a major component of the Voting Rights Act was held to be unconstitutional in the case Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, some states are still experiencing the benefits the Voting Rights Act was meant to provide.