States Ease Restrictions on Voting by Felons

3-7-17 Florida:

Florida proposal to lift its lifetime ban would add to a nationwide trend

Desmond Meade, homeless, addicted to drugs and suicidal, served three years in prison for gun possession before turning his life around and graduating from Florida International University Law School in 2014. But Mr. Meade couldn’t vote in last year’s elections—not even for his wife, a Florida House candidate.

That’s because Mr. Meade is among an estimated 6.1 million felons who have served their time and lost their right to vote, of whom about 1.7 million live in Florida. Virginia, Kentucky and Iowa are the only other states with lifetime voting bans, which can be lifted only through the clemency process. Other states impose waiting periods or require felons to complete parole or probation requirements.

Mr. Meade plans to be in the courtroom Monday when the Florida Supreme Court reviews a proposed constitutional amendment to allow felons, except for murderers and sex offenders, to vote after they finish their sentences, parole and probation. The court will decide whether the measure meets standards to go before voters, provided it gets enough signatures; Mr. Meade, as head of Floridians for a Fair Democracy, is leading the petition drive to put the amendment on the 2018 ballot. ..Continued.. by y Beth Reinhard Wall Street Journal

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sex offender's second suit attacks absentee ballots

8-19-15 Indiana:

Seeks class-action status in 2nd claim filed this year

Recent changes to state law prohibit sex offenders from being on school properties. Because many polling places are located in schools, or in churches with schools, state officials will allow registered sex offenders to vote by absentee ballots.

But a Blackford County man argues in a recent federal lawsuit that the absentee ballot process is “inferior” and prone to error and fraud.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis names the Indiana secretary of state, individual members of the Indiana Election Commission, the superintendent of the Indiana State Police and the Blackford County prosecutor as defendants.

Plaintiff Brian Valenti is seeking class-action status for the lawsuit, which is his second this year attacking ordinances and state laws designed to keep registered sex offenders from entering school properties.

In 1993, Valenti was convicted in California of lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years old. In 2014, he moved with his family to Blackford County, according to court documents.

Valenti sued Hartford City in March in the U.S. District Court in Fort Wayne over “child safety zones” created in the small city that prohibit registered sex offenders from going anyplace where children may congregate, from bowling alleys to public parks and movie theaters.

Valenti claimed in his lawsuit, filed with assistance from the American Civil Liberties Union, that Hartford City’s ordinance is vague, arbitrary, irrational and violates the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to U.S. Constitution.

He alleged that the ordinanance represents unconstitutional retroactive punishment, violating the U.S. Constitution as well as the Indiana Constitution.

Valenti’s new lawsuit, also filed with the ACLU’s assistance, takes aim at the state law that keeps registered sex offenders out of school properties.

He alleges that the absentee ballot process is inferior in many ways to traditional, location-based polling, according to court documents.

Voters must apply for absentee ballots, which must be mailed back to the election board before specific times, and the process encourages early voting, documents say.

“By voting early, absentee voters are deprived of any information pertinent to their vote that surfaces in the late stages of the election campaign, which could affect how they vote,” according to court documents.

He contends that there is no reason why his right to in-person voting should be “burdened by prohibiting him from voting in-person,” the documents say.

Valenti seeks an injunction prohibiting the law’s enforcement on Election Day; a declaration that the law is unconstitutional; and costs and fees, according to court documents.

“The right to vote is fundamental in a democracy,” said Jan Mensz, ACLU of Indiana staff attorney in a new release Tuesday. “Therefore, any attempt to impinge on that right must be justified by sufficiently weighty government interests. This statute does not meet that test.” ,,Source.. by Rebecca S. Green

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Suit: Law impedes sex offender’s voting rights

8-18-15 Indiana:

HARTFORD CITY – The Indiana Civil Liberties Union of Indiana on Wednesday filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of a Hartford City man concerned that a change in state law might impede his ability to vote.

A new law went into effect July 1 that prohibits “serious sex offenders” from entering school property.

“One of the consequences of this is that these persons will be prohibited from voting at their designated polling place if it is located on school property,” the ACLU’s suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis, contends.

In 1993, Valenti was convicted of “lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years” in California, drawing an eight-year sentence, according to the Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry.

According to the lawsuit, Valenti’s crime occurred in 1988, and he has not been convicted of “any other sex offenses against children either before or after that time.”

Valenti — who moved to Hartford City in 2014 — will be required to register with local authorities as a sex offender for the rest of his life, at least so long as he remains in Indiana.

“Mr. Valenti is registered to vote and intends to vote in future elections, including the upcoming municipal election on Nov. 3,” the suit states. “The polling place for Mr. Valenti’s precinct, however, is located on school property.”

The suit — filed by ACLU attorneys Kenneth Falk and Jan Mensz — acknowledges Valenti has the option of voting by absentee, but calls that an “onerous” process.

The lawsuit also says Valenti “would like to talk to people, including electioneers and candidates, outside of polling places.”

The Hartford City man “views voting in person on Election Day as a celebration of his right to vote and... something that should be shared publicly with his community.”

Defendants in the suit are Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson, the Indiana Election Board, Blackford County Prosecutor Kevin Basey and Doug Carter, superintendent of the Indiana State Police.

Valenti and the ACLU filed another federal suit in March, questioning the legality of a Hartford City ordinance concerning “child safety zones.”

That suit alleges the ordinance prevents Valenti from taking his child to the local library or area parks, visiting her school or attending church. ..Source.. by Douglas Walker

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Policy penalizes state's ex-offenders

5-20-2011 Florida:

Four years ago, Gov. Charlie Crist passed rules allowing more than 100,000 ex-offenders to regain their civil rights, including their right to vote. Those rules called for the automatic restoration of the civil rights of nonviolent offenders who have completed their sentences. On March 9, Gov. Rick Scott and his Cabinet voted to rescind those rights. Ex-offenders must apply to have their rights restored, but only after a waiting period of five to seven years, depending on the nature of the crime that led to their conviction. This new policy not only denies people who have served their sentences the right to vote but also means they will have a long wait to get other rights restored.

Some suspect that the governor's move was politically motivated, as those affected are disproportionately people of color who are more likely to vote Democrat. This regressive policy is now among the most restrictive in the country and will make it more difficult for ex-offenders to re-integrate successfully into society. It will make it harder for them to find work and sends a powerful message that their debt to society has not been paid, even after they have served their sentences. Scott and his administration purport to stand for fiscal responsibility. However, creating obstacles to the successful re-entry of ex-offenders into society is likely to increase criminal recidivism and, raise incarceration and other correctional costs, as well as the financial and other costs of additional crime. Ironically, the new policy undermines the considerable efforts of Florida's Department of Corrections aimed at reducing re-offending. In 2009, the Department of Corrections launched a five-year initiative called the Recidivism Reduction Strategic Plan. Most of the growth in Florida's prison population since 1985 is because of re-incarceration rather than the imprisonment of offenders who had never previously been in prison. The strategic plan is also based on the fact that 88 percent of inmates will be released at some point.

The Department of Corrections asserts that the restoration of the ex-offender's civil rights is a critical part of preventing criminal recidivism. Crist's Ex-Offender Task Force found that almost 40 percent of the 7.6 million jobs in Florida were subject to criminal background checks or restrictions based on criminal history. According to the Department of Corrections, finding and maintaining a job is vital to improving an offender's chances of staying out of prison. The Scott administration's new policy of withholding the restoration of the civil rights of ex-offenders will make it more difficult for offenders to become independent, compromises public safety and creates additional costs to taxpayers by undermining efforts to reduce the criminal recidivism rate. ..Source.. by Dr. Tom Gabor is president of Thomas Gabor, a criminal justice consulting firm based in Stuart.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...