A New Judicial Ruling will Open the Door for some Felons on Probation or Parole to Vote in North Carolina’s Elections in November.
The Ruling isn’t Final, so it’s possible that it could still Change between now and November.
But on Friday Sept. 4th, a Panel of Three Judges from Different Areas of the State, Ruled that Part of the State’s Felon Disenfranchisement Law appears to be Unconstitutional.
The Judges issued a 2-1 Ruling Stopping the State from Enforcing that Part of the Law, at least Temporarily.
They wrote that the People who Challenged it, calling it essentially a Poll Tax and a Relic of the Jim Crow era, appear to have a Winning Argument.
“It’s time to eradicate this vestige of Jim Crow,” said Daniel Jacobson, a Lawyer for the Challengers last month, when the Judges heard the Arguments from both sides.
Some States let Felons regain the Right to Vote once they Leave Prison, but not North Carolina. People here don’t get back their Rights until they have Finished their entire Sentence which includes Paying their Fines and Court Fees, after Probation or Parole.
This is similar to the Florida Case.
The Judges didn’t Extend Voting Rights to Everyone on Probation or Parole for a Felony, as the Challengers including Durham’s Community Success Initiative had asked.
But they did Rule in Favor of People who would have already Finished their Time under Supervision, except for Not Paying Fines and Court Fees.
The Judges wrote that “our Constitution is clear: no property qualification shall affect the right to vote.” So Preventing People from getting back their Right-to-Vote simply because of an Inability to Pay a certain Monetary Amount, the Judges Ruled, appears to be a Violation of the State Constitution. They said that if they hadn’t Struck down the Law, the Challengers would have Suffered “substantial and irreparable” Harm by Not being able to Vote this year.
One Member of the Three-Judge Panel, Superior Court Judge, John Dunlow of Franklin, Granville, Person, Vance, and Warren Counties, Dissented from that Part of the Ruling by Mecklenburg County Superior Court Judge, Lisa Bell and Wake County Superior Court Judge, Keith Gregory. Dunlow wrote that he would have Denied All of the Challengers’ Claims.
The Republican Leaders of the NC General Assembly, who are Defending the Law in Court, came away with some Victories in Friday’s Ruling, too. The Judges Stopped Enforcement Only Part of the Law, not the Whole Law. The Challengers had Originally said that if they were to Win this Lawsuit, it would Open-Up Voting Rights to around 60,000 North Carolinians. However, with this more Limited Ruling, it wasn’t immediately clear how many People with Felony Records would get back their Voting Rights.
In addition to the Argument about Court Fees and Fines serving a Double Function as a Poll Tax, more Sweeping Ruling was needed Against the State’s Felony Disenfranchisement Laws. For one, they said, People who are on Probation or Parole are, by definition, Out-of-Prison and back to Living-In and Contributing-To the Larger Society. They’re Paying Taxes and potentially sending their Kids to School and Deserve to have a Say in the Decisions that get made that Affect their and their Families’ Lives, the Lawsuit claimed. They also said the Rules Disproportionately harm Black People and are Rooted in an Explicitly Racist History.
North Carolina’s First Felon Disenfranchisement Law was Passed right after the Civil War, according to Historians, Explicitly as a way to Stop newly Freed Slaves from actually being able to Vote. And Evidence shows that even now, 150 years later, the Criminal Justice System still Disproportionately Harms Black Americans. Compared to White People facing the same Crimes and Potential Punishments, Studies show, Black people are both more likely to be Charged and are also given Harsher Punishments if Convicted.
However, the Judges weren’t willing to go as far as to Completely Overturn the Disenfranchisement Laws, just Ruling for the Challengers on the One Issue of Payments. They kept the rest of the Law Intact, at least for now, saying Lawmakers should get the chance to make more Detailed Arguments at Trial. On those other Claims, the Judges wrote, the Challengers do have “persuasive, historical evidence” in their Favor. But the Legislators, they added, “have also put forward numerous state interests supporting” the Felon Disenfranchisement Laws Overall.
The same Lawyers who helped argue the Felon Voting Rights Lawsuit also successfully argued last year’s Gerrymandering Cases, which Ended with the General Assembly having to Redraw the State’s Political Maps to be less slanted toward Republicans for the 2020 Elections.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment