In the United States, a person might have their voting rights suspended or withdrawn due to a conviction for committing a criminal offense. The actual class of crimes that results in disenfranchisement vary between jurisdictions, but is most commonly classed as felonies, or may be based on a certain period of incarceration or other penalty. In some jurisdictions disfranchisement is permanent, while in others suffrage is restored after a person has served a sentence, or completed parole or probation. Felony disenfranchisement is one among the collateral consequences of criminal conviction and the loss of rights due to conviction for criminal offense. In 2016, 6.1 million individuals were disenfranchised on account of a conviction, 2.47% of voting-age citizens. As of October 2020, it was estimated that 5.1 million voting-age US citizens were disenfranchised for the 2020 presidential election on account of a felony conviction, 1 in 44 citizens.CNN, More than 5 million people with felony convictions can't vote in this year's election, advocacy group finds, October 15, 2020. As suffrage rights are generally bestowed by state law, state felony disenfranchisement laws also apply to elections to federal offices.
Proponents have argued that persons who commit felonies have broken the social contract, and have thereby given up their right to participate in a civil society. Some argue that felons have shown poor judgment, and that they should therefore not have a voice in the political decision-making process.Eli L. Levine, "Does the Social Contract Justify Felony Disenfranchisement?", 1 Wash. U. Jur. Rev. 193 (2009). Opponents have argued that such disfranchisement restricts and conflicts with principles of universal suffrage. It can affect civic and communal participation in general. Opponents argue that felony disenfranchisement can create political incentives to skew criminal law in favor of disproportionately targeting groups who are political opponents of those who hold power.
Many states adopted felon voting bans in the 1860s and 1870s, at the same time that voting rights for African Americans citizens were being considered and contested. Scholars have linked the origins and intents of many state felon voting bans to racial discrimination. In some states, legislators have been accused of specifically tailoring felon voting bans to purposely and disproportionately target African Americans, for example, by targeting minor crimes more common among these citizens while allowing felons who committed more serious crimes (such as murder) to vote.
History
The first US felony provisions were introduced in 1792 in Kentucky, although the first actual law disenfranchising felons was introduced by Connecticut in 1818. By 1840, four states had felony disenfranchisement policies. By the American Civil War, about 24 states had some form of felony disenfranchisement policy or similar provision in the state constitution, although only eighteen actually disenfranchised felons. The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, and by 1870 the number had increased to 28 (out of 38 states).
The surge of felony disenfranchisement laws after the Civil War led many to conclude that the laws were implemented as part of a strategy to disenfranchise African Americans, especially as the policy was expanded in conjunction with the Black Codes, which established severe penalties for petty crimes and especially targeted African Americans.
As of 2018, most U.S. states had policies to restore voting rights upon completion of a sentence. Only a couple states — Iowa, and Virginia specifically — permanently disenfranchised a felony convict and 6 other states limited restoration based on crimes of "moral turpitude".
The US Supreme Court in Richardson v. Ramirez (1974),Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974) interpreted section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment as permitting states to disenfranchise convicted criminals, leaving them to decide which crimes would be grounds for disenfranchisement, which are not restricted to felonies, though in most cases they do. Felons who have completed their sentences are allowed to vote in most states. Between 1996 and 2008, 28 states changed their laws on felon voting rights, mostly to restore rights or to simplify the process of restoration. Since 2008, state laws have continued to shift, both curtailing and restoring voter rights, sometimes over short periods of time within the same state.
Recent statistics
As of 2008, over 5.3 million people in the United States were denied the right to vote due to felony disenfranchisement. In the national elections in 2012, the various state felony disenfranchisement laws together blocked an estimated 5.85 million felons from voting, up from 1.2 million in 1976. This comprised 2.5% of the potential voters in general. The state with the highest number of disenfranchised voters was Florida, with 1.5 million disenfranchised because of a current or previous felony conviction, over 10% of the voting age citizens, including the 774,000 disenfranchised only because of outstanding financial obligations. In October 2020, it was estimated that 5.1 million citizens were disenfranchised for the 2020 presidential election on account of a felony conviction, 1 in 44 citizens. Nearly 4.1 million people are disenfranchised as of 2026.
2016 estimates of disenfranchised individuals with felony convictions State In prison On parole On felonyprobation In jail Post-sentence Total Voting agepopulation Percent 30,585 6,580 15,626 1,578 231,896 286,266 3,755,483 7.62% 5,497 2,035 6,900 7 - 14,439 552,166 2.61% 44,509 7,241 51,362 1,341 116,717 221,170 5,205,215 4.25% 19,224 21,811 24,695 975 - 66,705 2,272,904 2.93% 136,302 86,254 - - - 222,557 30,023,902 0.74% 21,207 8,673 - 1,066 - 30,946 4,199,509 0.74% 14,926 2,419 - - - 17,345 2,826,827 0.61% 6,858 716 4,074 - 4,067 15,716 741,548 2.12% 102,555 4,208 86,886 4,822 1,487,847 1,686,318 16,166,143 10.43% 50,900 23,545 170,194 4,112 - 248,751 7,710,688 3.23% 6,364 - - - - 6,364 1,120,770 0.57% 7,873 5,057 9,863 314 - 23,206 1,222,093 1.89% 47,537 - - 2,089 - 49,625 9,901,322 0.50% 9,127 6,133 12,365 410 23,976 52,012 2,395,103 2.17% 28,028 - - 1,630 - 29,658 5,040,224 0.59% 9,466 4,023 3,426 679 - 17,594 2,192,084 0.80% 22,968 16,729 27,323 2,039 242,987 312,046 3,413,425 9.14% 35,614 31,450 37,761 3,211 - 108,035 3,555,911 3.04% - - - - - - 1,072,948 0.00% 20,378 - - 1,087 - 21,465 4,658,175 0.46% 10,254 - - 921 - 11,176 5,407,335 0.21% 42,661 - - 1,560 - 44,221 7,715,272 0.57% 11,369 8,148 43,215 608 - 63,340 4,205,207 1.51% 13,752 8,051 28,463 1,422 166,494 218,181 2,265,485 9.63% 32,768 16,808 38,870 1,219 - 89,665 4,692,196 1.91% 3,816 - - 330 - 4,146 806,529 0.51% 37,446 10,977 40,867 1,888 - 91,179 7,752,234 1.18% 2,042 - - 136 - 2,178 583,001 0.37% 6,377 782 2,952 384 7,069 17,564 1,425,853 1.23% 11,560 6,828 8,097 701 62,080 89,267 2,221,681 4.02% 2,856 - - 175 - 3,031 1,066,610 0.28% 19,964 14,831 58,123 1,396 - 94,315 6,959,192 1.36% 7,205 2,838 13,352 891 - 24,286 1,588,201 1.53% 50,513 44,590 - 2,477 - 97,581 15,584,974 0.63% 51,102 - - 1,736 - 52,837 8,984,946 0.59% 27,857 2,572 26,475 1,398 - 58,302 2,950,017 1.98% 14,228 - - 519 - 14,748 3,166,121 0.47% 49,269 - - 3,705 - 52,974 10,112,229 0.52% 3,355 - - - - 3,355 845,254 0.40% 20,141 4,621 21,464 1,011 - 47,238 3,804,558 1.24% 3,464 2,643 4,114 170 - 10,392 647,145 1.61% 29,271 13,186 52,654 2,763 323,354 421,224 5,102,688 8.26% 161,658 111,632 216,033 6,605 - 495,928 20,257,343 2.45% 6,925 - - 744 - 7,669 2,083,423 0.37% - - - - - - 506,119 0.00% 38,694 1,604 56,908 2,905 408,570 508,680 6,512,571 7.81% 18,395 3,811 25,164 1,182 - 48,552 5,558,509 0.87% 7,042 3,187 4,109 389 - 14,727 1,464,532 1.01% 22,851 19,537 22,101 1,118 - 65,606 4,476,711 1.47% 2,536 607 3,148 141 17,414 23,847 447,212 5.33% Total1,329,288504,1271,116,58563,8553,092,4716,106,327247,219,5882.47%
Reform efforts Challenges to felony disenfranchisement laws began in the 1950s as part of the effort of advocating for a shift from retribution to rehabilitation in the American penal system. After the latter part of the 1950s, the ratio of states disenfranchising those convicted of crimes decreased; in the twentieth century, some categories of felons were disenfranchised while others were not and several state laws were revised to provide a broader criminal coverage. Disenfranchisement laws have been amended, since 1997, by 23 states. These reforms take three forms: repeal of lifetime disenfranchisement laws; expansion of voting rights; and simplification of the process of restoring voting rights post-incarceration.
In 2002, Representative Maxine Waters (D, CA) introduced H.R.2830, the Voting Restoration Act, to congress.
From 1997 to 2008, there was a trend to lift the disenfranchisement restrictions, or simplify the procedures for applying for the restoration of civil rights for people who had fulfilled their punishments for felonies. As a result, in 2008, more than a half-million people had the right to vote who would have been disenfranchised under prior restrictions.
Felony disenfranchisement was a topic of debate during the 2012 Republican presidential primary. Primary candidate Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania argued for the restoration of voting rights for convicted felons who had completed sentences and parole or probation. Santorum's position was attacked and distorted by Mitt Romney, who alleged that Santorum supported voting rights for felons while incarcerated. Former President Barack Obama supports voting rights for ex-offenders.
In a report submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 2013, a coalition of non-profit civil rights and criminal justice organizations argued that US felony disenfranchisement laws are in violation of Articles 25 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by the United States in 1992.
In 2017, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D, MD) introduced S. 1588, the Democracy Restoration Act of 2017 to Congress.
Felony disenfranchisement reforms between 1997 and 2018 have resulted in 1.4 million Americans regaining voting rights.
During the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, candidate Bernie Sanders argued that all felons should be allowed to vote from prison. His home state of Vermont is one of only two states (with Maine) that do not disenfranchise felons while in prison.
Florida
In November 2018, Florida voters approved Amendment 4, an amendment to the Florida constitution to automatically restore voting rights to convicted felons who have served their sentences. In July 2019, Republicans in Florida's state legislature enacted S. 7066, which stipulates that felons must pay all outstanding fines, fees, and restitutions before they are deemed to have “served their sentence” and thus regain their right to vote. On February 19, 2020, a 3-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that it was unconstitutional to force Floridian felons to first pay their financial obligations off before reregistering to vote. However, on September 11, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit overturned the lower court ruling that all fines do not have to be paid off before felons can be re-enfranchised. The appeals court ruling had the effect of again disenfranchising around 774,000 people, about a month before the 2020 U.S. presidential election. In late September 2020, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg put a fund of over $16 million together to be used towards helping convicted felons vote in Florida by paying their outstanding fines and fees. Bloomberg's fund as well as the $5 million raised by the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition paid the outstanding fines off of around 32,000 felons.Bloomberg raises millions to help restore Florida felon voting rights
Iowa