Latest

Wisconsin: Media Support for Re-enfranchisement As Wisconsin is in the midst of charging a handful of formerly incarcerated individuals with voter fraud, a Wisconsin Journal Sentinel editorial stated that permitting voting by people released from prison would help integrate them back into society, streamline the administration of elections, promote democracy and provide law enforcement more opportunity to enforce more pressing issues. Further, the editorial asserted that "disenfranchisement laws compound the racial imbalance. They sap the political strength of black Wisconsin." Wisconsin law currently bans individuals from voting until parole and probation are completed. Arizona: Voting Ban Challenged in Federal Lawsuit The American Civil Liberties Union this week filed a federal lawsuit challenging Arizona's voting ban which denies the right to vote to people with felony convictions who have not paid financial penalties associated with the conviction, according to the Arizona Republic. In Coronado v. Napolitano, the organization says the ban is akin to a modern "poll tax" and constitutes a violation of the 14th Amendment. The ACLU has targeted similar laws across the nation, including a Washington State lower court ruling which is now pending in the state Supreme Court. "Throughout recent years, it has become common practice for states to expand the list of disfranchising felonies, and the end result is that thousands of people are losing their political voice and being deliberately shut out of the democratic process," said Nancy Abudu, staff attorney with the ACLU National Voting Rights Project in Atlanta. For more coverage, see VoteLaw.com and Ballot-Access. National: Disenfranchisement - The Modern-Day Poll Tax An article by Erika Wood and Neema Trivedi of the Brennan Center for Justice , entitled "The Modern- Day Poll Tax: How Economic Sanctions Block Access to the Polls," has just been published in the Clearinghouse Review. The article details the over two-centuries-old tradition of disenfranchisement and how it became a practice in targeting formerly incarcerated individuals. "The spread of felony disenfranchisement laws in the late 1800s was part of a larger backlash against the adoption of the Reconstruction Amendments. Despite newfound eligibility, many freedmen remained practically disenfranchised as a result of organized efforts to prevent them from voting," the article states. The article reviews in detail Equal Rights legal challenges, the various types of economic sanctions and the racial impact of disenfranchisement. Alabama: Decision Set Aside, but Disenfranchised Still Have a Chance Judge Robert Vance's August decision lifting the post- sentence voting ban for all Alabamians was set aside by the Alabama Supreme Court last week, the Associated Press reported. In a prior ruling, Judge Vance held that a state constitutional amendment denying voting rights to persons convicted of crimes of moral turpitude does not sufficiently identify all crimes which fit that definition, according to the Decatur Daily. Judge Vance felt that this ambiguity was impermissible and ruled that all persons should be allowed to vote upon completion of sentence until the state legislature specifies exactly what offense types are classified as crimes of moral turpitude. This week, the Supreme Court held that the August ruling "exceeded its authority" by recasting the character and substance of the case into "forbidden territory of the abstract and hypothetical." Although the Supreme Court ruling may initially appear as a setback to voting rights advocates, it provides important clarification regarding the responsibility of state officials to permit persons to register to vote if they have been convicted of certain felony offenses that have not been defined as crimes of moral turpitude. These include: felony DUI, felony possession of drugs, violation of liquor laws, assault and battery, speeding, trespass to land, attempted burglary, doing business without a license and aiding a prisoner to escape. The practice by the previous Secretary of State, which called for the denial of voting rights to persons convicted of all types of felonies, was the original catalyst for the lawsuit. "Now we have a ruling requiring state officials to follow the law and permit eligible felons to vote," stated the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which filed the suit along with attorney Ed Still. - - - - - - Help The Sentencing Project continue to bring you news and updates on disenfranchisement! Make a contribution today. Contact Information: Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.sentencingproject.org

Join us at the 2007 International Drug Policy Reform Conference at the Astor Crowne Plaza in New Orleans, Louisiana. The conference begins the evening of Wednesday, December 5, and runs through Saturday, December 8. Register early to get a special rate! The International Drug Policy Reform Conference, hosted by DPA, is the most important gathering of people who believe the war on drugs is doing more harm than good. It's the only meeting that attempts to connect the dots among the wide range of drug policy issues we face today: everything from syringe access and medical marijuana to state-based reform movements and the impact of drug use on our culture and communities. In our effort to make this event truly movement-oriented, this year we invited five other co-host organizations to join us: the ACLU, the Harm Reduction Coalition, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Marijuana Policy Project and Students for Sensible Drug Policy. Together, we will present the most engaging content that reflects our conference theme: Working Toward a New Bottom Line. A new bottom line for drug policy would mean basing success on metrics such as prevention of overdose deaths and increased access to treatment rather than the current measure - numbers of people arrested and incarcerated for drug use. The idea of working toward a new bottom line is particularly relevant in New Orleans, the site of the 2007 conference. Hurricane Katrina laid bare an array of problems, many of which are exacerbated by failed drug war policies. Furthermore, the state of Louisiana comes close to leading the nation in incarcerating people for drug law violations. Although the South remains a region where drug policy reform has yet to take a strong hold, by choosing to have our meeting in New Orleans, we hope to build momentum in an area with the potential to make incredible progress. Members and early-bird registrants enjoy a significant discount off our regular registration rate. For more information, including details about conference programming, travel and lodging, please check out http://kessjones.com/conf07/. We hope to see you in New Orleans!