Hot Topic (1/8): Do felons deserve the right to vote?

[Cafe GroupAdmin]

Prison voting headed to U.S. Supreme Court? State leaders say yes
AG McKenna says he'll argue the case himself if the high court accepts

Two state leaders say they'll ask that the U.S. Supreme Court review a federal court decision clearing the way for inmate voting in Washington.

Following Tuesday's decision by a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel revoking the state prohibition on felon voting, Attorney General Rob McKenna and Secretary of State Sam Reed now say they'll ask the nation's highest court to review the decision.

The decision, hailed as a landmark win for prisoner-rights advocates, effectively removed the state's restrictions on felon voting on civil-rights grounds.

Under the Washington law at issue, citizens convicted of a felony lose the right to vote until they are released from custody and off of Department of Corrections supervision. The 2-1 ruling by a Circuit Court of Appeals panel put those restrictions in doubt, with the majority finding that the state restrictions unfairly penalize minorities.

In an announcement Wednesday afternoon, McKenna and Reed said they believe the issue is ripe for review by the Supreme Court, and that their agencies -- defendants in the lawsuit alongside the governor's office -- will ask for such a hearing. Objecting to the appeals court decision, both noted circuit courts elsewhere in the nation have come to the opposite conclusion while reviewing similar cases.

"This case began back in 1996, it's been to the 9th Circuit twice already and now it's time for the U.S. Supreme Court to step in to resolve the split between the federal courts of appeals that the 9th Circuit has created," McKenna said in a statement. "The felon disenfranchisement laws of Washington and 47 other states hang in the balance."

McKenna added that, should the Supreme Court accept the case, he intends to argue it himself.

Attorneys for six Washington state prisoners, Circuit Court Judge A. Wallace Tashima wrote, "have demonstrated that police practices, searches, arrests, detention practices, and plea bargaining practices lead to a greater burden on minorities that cannot be explained in race-neutral ways."

Joined by Judge Stephen Reinhardt in the majority opinion, Tashima found no "race neutral" explanation for the higher incarceration rates and reversed a U.S. District Court decision in favor of the felons.

"Although (the state) criticized the experts' studies and the conclusions, the (plaintiffs') reports, when objectively viewed, support a finding of racial discrimination in Washington's criminal justice system," Tashima said in the ruling.

Writing in dissent, U.S. Circuit Court Judge Margaret McKeown said that the merits of the case should be heard at trial. Instead, her colleagues on the bench granted a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, effectively settling the case pending an appeal.

Echoing McKeown's contention, Reed said in a statement that prohibitions like Washington's are on the books across the nation.

"The U.S. Constitution, the Washington Constitution and the laws of 47 other states all agree that felons may lose this important civil right when they violate the rights of others by committing egregious violations of the law," Reed said in a statement. "I'm pleased the Attorney General will be taking this case to the U.S. Supreme Court and expect a positive outcome."

Arguing the case, attorneys for the prisoners turned to a series of studies conducted in Seattle and elsewhere in the state showing that racial minorities were charged with crimes at rates far higher than could be explained by differences in levels of criminal activity, said Lawrence A. Weiser, a Gonzaga University law professor involved with the case since the mid-1990s.

"The issue is discrimination in the criminal justice system," said Weiser, director of Gonzaga's clinical law program. "The fact is that the disenfranchisement law has always been used to disenfranchise minority communities."

Recent Department of Corrections figures show that about 28 percent of the state's prison population is African-American, according to statistics cited in the suit. In contrast, African-Americans account for about 3 percent of Washington's population.

A review of arrest records, the plaintiffs argued, showed that increased criminal behavior could not account for the disproportionately high incarceration rates among black Washingtonians.

"The disparities aren't reflective of the actual participation in crime," said Ryan Haygood, co-director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which participated in the suit. "They're reflective of the discrimination in the criminal justice system."

Speaking on the ruling Tuesday, Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed said the court's decision came as a surprise, in part because three circuit court panels elsewhere in the country came to opposite conclusions while reviewing similar cases.

Reed said he believes the state prohibition against prisoner voting remains appropriate.

"That's part of the penalty," Reed said. "A person loses their rights when they violate the rights of others by perpetrating a felony. … As long as when they get out they get a chance to rejoin society, that's the important part."

Reed said he supported a recent change in state law aimed at enabling felons returning to society to regain the vote. Under the new rules, felons no longer have to pay off their court-mandated fines before registering to vote.

Filed 14 years ago, the suit named Reed's office as a defendant, as well as the Attorney General's Office and the governor's office.

In a July 2006 ruling in favor of the state, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Whaley agreed that "evidence of racial bias in Washington's criminal justice system is compelling." Still, the Spokane judge ruled, that fact alone was not sufficient to sustain a challenge under the federal Voting Rights Act.

"Taking all of the relevant factors into account, the Court finds that the totality of the circumstances does not support a finding that Washington's felon disenfranchisement law results in discrimination in its electoral process on account of race," Whaley said in the decision now reversed by the U.S. Circuit Court panel.

Among the evidence offered to support the plaintiffs' claims was a recent study on drug arrests in Seattle. The 2004 study, conducted by University of Washington sociologist Katherine Beckett, found that blacks and Latinos were disproportionately arrested on drug charges in part because of a police emphasis on street dealing of crack cocaine.

According to her statements to the court, Beckett found that most drug users and drug dealers in the city are white. Still, 64 percent of those arrested dealing "serious" drugs were black; only 17 percent of those caught in police sting operations were white.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that Beckett's findings show that police have concentrated on outdoor drug sales areas frequented by minorities in the city's Pioneer Square and downtown neighborhoods. At the same time, the attorneys argued, city police neglected drug sales areas frequented by whites in Seattle's University District and Capitol Hill.

* * *

Should felons have the right to vote?

What rights do prisoners deserve?

[tericared]

 Should felons have the right to vote?

If they have served their time they should be allowed to vote....

What rights do prisoners deserve?

Prisoners shouldnt have any rights except to serve their time without unusual and inhumane treatment...

[lbranta]

Yes they should have their right to vote after their time is served and its all done I think they should have all the same rights as anyone else and do not believe their past should be held against them in most cases except things like rape so they stand a better chance of being able to make a living wage so they do not have to recommit crimes to survive.  They live here and are citizens then they should have a say so in the vote like everyone else

[athenax3]

Quoting tericared:

 Should felons have the right to vote?

If they have served their time they should be allowed to vote....

What rights do prisoners deserve?

Prisoners shouldnt have any rights except to serve their time without unusual and inhumane treatment...

this

[rubyjro13]

Uh yes yes yes

[smcclure2005]

Yes..if I have a right not to they should have a right to vote...especially if they served their time..

[MommaChristmas]

Quoting tericared:

 Should felons have the right to vote?

If they have served their time they should be allowed to vote....

What rights do prisoners deserve?

Prisoners shouldnt have any rights except to serve their time without unusual and inhumane treatment...

I agree with this.

[conniecabe]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't part of incarceration losing your rights?  Isn't one of those rights, the ability to vote?  Incarcerated felons should not be able to vote. I don't see it as discrimination, I see it as punishment for the crimes they have committed.

[katy_kay]

I think states should have a means for felons to regain their voting rights once they have paid their debt to society.  I don't agree with the policy of allowing them to vote from prison but it isn't unheard of as two states, Maine and Vermont both allow for felons to vote while incarcerated.  Most states already have a process in place for allowing people to regain their voting rights.  I believe it is only 13 states that currently consider a permanent revocation and the state that this case is happening in is one of them.  (Washington) 

This site lists the rules by state...

http://felonvoting.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=000286

[trippyhippy]

I think as soon as you have paid your debt to society you should get your right to vote back.

[Talee]

Quoting katy_kay:

I think states should have a means for felons to regain their voting rights once they have paid their debt to society.  I don't agree with the policy of allowing them to vote from prison but it isn't unheard of as two states, Maine and Vermont both allow for felons to vote while incarcerated.  Most states already have a process in place for allowing people to regain their voting rights.  I believe it is only 13 states that currently consider a permanent revocation and the state that his case is happening in is one of them.  (Washington) 

This site lists the rules by state...

http://felonvoting.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=000286

I was under this impression as well. I do not agree with voting from prison at all.

I think once they are out and have complete parole etc and are not repeat offenders...then give them their right to vote back.