Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

ACLU Sues Over Tennessees Felon Disenfranchisement Law

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 08:25 AM
Original message
ACLU Sues Over Tennessees Felon Disenfranchisement Law (2/25/2008)


Group Says Payment Provision Is A Modern Day Poll Tax

NASHVILLE The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Tennessee filed a lawsuit today in federal court challenging the states 2006 law that made the restoration of voting rights for people convicted of crimes contingent on the payment of all outstanding legal financial obligations (LFOs), namely restitution and child support fees. According to the ACLUs lawsuit, requiring some individuals to bear an undue financial burden before voting is tantamount to a poll tax in violation of the constitutional right to vote and the Fourteenth Amendments equal protection clause.

Reports show that, nationally, over 50 percent of criminal defendants are indigent at the time of sentencing. Therefore, requiring a person with a criminal conviction to pay a fee before restoring their right to vote is nothing more than a modern day poll tax, said Nancy Abudu, staff counsel with the ACLU Voting Rights Project. This law locks citizens out of the democratic process when it comes to issues of great concern to them. The result is that the political power of poor people is further diminished and the collateral consequences of poverty multiply.

Todays legal action, filed against state and county officials, challenges a 2006 law that changed the process by which individuals with criminal convictions may seek the restoration of their voting rights. According to the law, a person shall not be eligible to apply for a voter registration card and have the right of suffrage restored unless such person has paid all restitution to the victim or victims of the offense ordered by the court as part of the sentence... unless such person is current in all child support obligations.

The ACLU brought its lawsuit on behalf of three individuals Terence Johnson, Jim Harris and Alexander Friedman who have completed their terms of imprisonment, parole, and probation for their offenses. Johnson and Harris are ineligible to vote because they owe child support for children they currently have custody of. Friedman applied for restoration of his voting rights in 2006, but Tennessee denied his application, claiming he owes over 1,000 dollars in restitution.

My dream is to have the opportunity to become a fully productive citizen again, regardless of my economic status. And I have the right to participate in the electoral process to bring about change to the issues that concern me most in my community, said Terence Johnson, a plaintiff in this case. Ive served my time, I am a taxpaying citizen and I have custody of my daughter. It is wrong for the state to punish me and other people while we get our lives back on track.

Until recently, Tennessees voting rights restoration law a patchwork of rules, restrictions, and procedures was the most confusing and complicated in the country. Although a former felon no longer needs to go before a judge to have his or her right to vote restored, the law still requires several procedural steps before restoration is complete. The ACLU is committed to securing additional reforms to make Tennessees voting laws more user-friendly and to ensure that all people who have been incarcerated can regain their full voting rights.

The ability to vote should not be based on ones financial status, said Hedy Weinberg, Executive Director of the ACLU of Tennessee. Penalizing low-income parents by charging them a fee to exercise their constitutional right to vote is shameful. This law has no place in a functioning democracy.

In addition to the equal protection claim, the ACLUs lawsuit charges the Tennessee law violates the 24th Amendments voting rights provision and the due process protections in the federal and state constitutions.

Attorneys on the case are Abudu, Laughlin McDonald and Neil Bradley of the national ACLU Voting Rights Project, Tricia Herzfeld of the ACLU of Tennessee, and attorney Charles Grant of the law firm Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC.

A copy of todays legal complaint is available at:

More information on the work of the ACLU Voting Rights Project is available at:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC