Latest news with #JamesDennis
The Hill
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Appeals panel declines Louisiana's invitation to gut Voting Rights Act
A federal appeals court panel declined Louisiana's invitation to gut a key provision of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) that has required the state to draw additional majority-minority districts, ruling Thursday that the argument is foreclosed by binding precedent. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision upholds a judge's ruling that blocked Louisiana's state legislative maps by finding they 'packed' and 'cracked' Black communities in violation of Section 2, the VRA's central remaining provision. The state urged the 5th Circuit, regarded as the nation's most conservative federal appeals court, to use the case to rule Section 2 unconstitutional by finding that conditions in the state no longer justify race-conscious remedies. The panel wrote that the Pelican State's position would 'eschew a clear mandate from the Supreme Court and disregard Congress's intent,' only briefly addressing the argument in the final three of the opinion's 54 pages. 'The State's challenge to the constitutionality of § 2 is foreclosed by decades of binding precedent affirming Congress's broad enforcement authority under the Fifteenth Amendment,' the ruling reads. Left unmentioned was the Supreme Court's case next term over Louisiana's congressional map, which raises overlapping questions about the VRA's future. The high court heard arguments this spring but will rehear the case Oct. 15. 'We strongly disagree with the Fifth Circuit panel's decision. We are reviewing our options with a focus on stability in our elections and preserving state and judicial resources while the Supreme Court resolves related issues,' Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill (R) said in a statement. The 5th Circuit panel on Thursday also rejected Louisiana's separate argument that would broadly weaken the VRA: private parties have no right to sue under Section 2. It would take away the ability for cases to be brought civil rights groups like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which brought the underlying lawsuit, and leave any challenges to the Justice Department. Louisiana's case has attracted attention particularly after the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals adopted the position at the urging of other Republican-led states. But the 5th Circuit panel relegated the argument to a footnote, saying it 'is foreclosed by Fifth Circuit precedent.' The panel comprised James Dennis, nominated to the bench by former President Clinton, Catharina Haynes, nominated by former President George W. Bush, and Irma Carrillo Ramirez, nominated by former President Biden. Most of the panel's unsigned opinion was dedicated to Louisiana's narrower arguments to overturn the lower ruling blocking its state legislative maps. Louisiana argued U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick improperly set an expedited trial date, she was required to transfer the case to a three-judge panel and she failed to correctly apply Supreme Court precedent on the VRA. The panel rejected all those arguments, leaving the Obama-nominated judge's block in place. Dick ruled in February 2024 that the designs disenfranchised thousands of Black voters in violation of Section 2. She was prepared to order the state to conduct a special election rather than wait for the next cycle in 2027, but the 5th Circuit declined to allow her to do so as they considered the case.
Yahoo
27-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
US Supreme Court rejects challenge to Mississippi lifetime ban on voting by felons
By Andrew Chung (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear a challenge to Mississippi's lifetime ban on voting by people convicted of a wide range of felonies, a policy adopted in 1890 during the Jim Crow era that stands as one of the toughest such restrictions in the nation. The justices turned away an appeal of a lower court's decision rejecting a lawsuit that claimed that the ban - a provision of the Mississippi constitution that applies even after a sentence has been completed - violates the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment promise of equal protection and Eighth Amendment bar on cruel and unusual punishments. The class action suit was brought in 2018 by six Mississippi men - including white and Black plaintiffs - who lost the right to vote even though they have completed their sentences for various felonies, including grand larceny and receiving stolen property. The case centers on Section 241 of the Mississippi Constitution, which denies people who have been convicted of a range of felonies the right to vote for life. The range of crimes include murder, rape, bribery, theft, forgery and arson, but lawyers for the plaintiffs have said it applies regardless of the seriousness of the felony, even "writing a bad check for $100 or stealing $250 worth of timber." Section 241 was adopted by a state constitutional convention with the racist intent to undermine the electoral power of Black people after they gained the right to vote following the 1861-1865 U.S. Civil War that ended slavery in states including Mississippi. The provision removed crimes thought to be "white crimes" and added those thought to be "black crimes," according to court papers. Following the end of the post-Civil War reconstruction period, policies of racial segregation and disenfranchisement of Black people were broadly enforced by white leaders in numerous U.S. states including Mississippi using what were called Jim Crow laws. More than 58% of currently disenfranchised Mississippi residents who have completed their sentences are Black, according to lawyers for the plaintiffs, adding that Mississippi and Virginia are the only two states that continue to "permanently disenfranchise first-time offenders who were convicted of non-violent and non-voting-related felonies." Black people make up 38% of the state's population, according to U.S. census statistics. A three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from Mississippi, in 2023 ruled 2-1 in favor of the claim by the plaintiffs that the ban violates the Eighth Amendment. "Mississippi stands as an outlier among its sister states, bucking a clear and consistent trend in our nation against permanent disenfranchisement," Judge James Dennis wrote in the opinion. In 2024, however, the full 5th Circuit reconsidered the case and voted 13-6 to uphold the ban. The Supreme Court in 2023 declined to hear a separate constitutional challenge to Section 241, prompting a dissent by liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who wrote that the remaining crimes from the provision's "pernicious origin still work the very harm the 1890 convention intended - denying Black Mississippians the vote." A convicted felon's voting rights can be restored in Mississippi only by a two-thirds vote of the state legislature - something that happened just 18 times between 2013 and 2018, according to the plaintiffs, or a pardon by the governor.
Yahoo
27-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Cruel and unusual? Supreme Court declines to review Mississippi voting ban for convicted felons
WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court declined Monday to decide whether a permanent voting ban on people convicted of felonies in Mississippi is cruel and unusual punishment. The court, in 2023, had also rejected a different challenge to the state's voting restriction that was based on the fact it was drafted in 1890 as part of a racist effort to disenfranchise Black voters. Mississippi is one of eleven states that don't automatically restore voting rights after convicted felons finish their sentences. Voting rights experts say Mississippi's restrictions are among the harshest because the state bans voting by first-time offenders who commit non-violent felonies. And the process for restoring the right is onerous. The criminal justice advocates who brought the challenge on behalf of Mississippians who have lost voting rights – including a man who bought a stolen appliance decades ago − said the ban is punishing tens of thousands of residents who have completed their sentences. A divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit last year dismissed the challenge, pointing to a 1974 Supreme Court decision that the Constitution's equal protection clause does not prevent states from banning felons from voting. The appeals court said that previous decision means those opposed to Mississippi's ban must 'do the hard work of persuading your fellow citizens that the law should change.' The majority also said felon disenfranchisement is "not a punishment, much less cruel or unusual." The appeals court judges who dissented said there's now a national consensus among a large majority of states that permanent disenfranchisement of those who have completed their sentences is an exceptionally severe punishment. 'These individuals, despite having satisfied their debt to society, are precluded from ever fully participating in civic life,' Judge James Dennis wrote. 'To be sure, they are excluded from the most essential feature and expression of citizenship in a democracy − voting.' Since 1974, twenty-six states have expanded voting rights for those with past felony convictions, according to filings. A Mississippian can regain the right to vote through a pardon from the governor or if two-thirds of the state legislature approves the request, which rarely happens. The voting restrictions were included in the state's constitution after an 1890 convention in which delegates eliminated the right to vote for people convicted of felonies thought to be "Black crimes," a perception based largely on which crimes were prosecuted. The issue in the previous challenge the Supreme Court declined to consider was whether the 'taint' of a Jim Crow-era law could be 'cured' by later amendments that removed burglary from the list of crimes and added murder and rape. This time, the issue was whether the restrictions violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments, and whether the Supreme Court's 1974 decision prevents a challenge. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court won't review Mississippi's voting ban for felons
USA Today
27-01-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
Cruel and unusual? Supreme Court declines to review Mississippi voting ban for convicted felons
Cruel and unusual? Supreme Court declines to review Mississippi voting ban for convicted felons Mississippi is one of eleven states that don't automatically restore voting rights after convicted felons finish their sentences. Show Caption Hide Caption Ketanji Brown Jackson lights up stage at Broadway musical "& Juliet" Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson treated "& Juliet" fans to a special performance for one night only! WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court declined Monday to decide whether a permanent voting ban on people convicted of felonies in Mississippi is cruel and unusual punishment. The court, in 2023, had also rejected a different challenge to the state's voting restriction that was based on the fact it was drafted in 1890 as part of a racist effort to disenfranchise Black voters. Mississippi is one of eleven states that don't automatically restore voting rights after convicted felons finish their sentences. Voting rights experts say Mississippi's restrictions are among the harshest because the state bans voting by first-time offenders who commit non-violent felonies. And the process for restoring the right is onerous. The criminal justice advocates who brought the challenge on behalf of Mississippians who have lost voting rights – including a man who bought a stolen appliance decades ago − said the ban is punishing tens of thousands of residents who have completed their sentences. A divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit last year dismissed the challenge, pointing to a 1974 Supreme Court decision that the Constitution's equal protection clause does not prevent states from banning felons from voting. The appeals court said that previous decision means those opposed to Mississippi's ban must 'do the hard work of persuading your fellow citizens that the law should change.' The majority also said felon disenfranchisement is "not a punishment, much less cruel or unusual." The appeals court judges who dissented said there's now a national consensus among a large majority of states that permanent disenfranchisement of those who have completed their sentences is an exceptionally severe punishment. 'These individuals, despite having satisfied their debt to society, are precluded from ever fully participating in civic life,' Judge James Dennis wrote. 'To be sure, they are excluded from the most essential feature and expression of citizenship in a democracy − voting.' Since 1974, twenty-six states have expanded voting rights for those with past felony convictions, according to filings. A Mississippian can regain the right to vote through a pardon from the governor or if two-thirds of the state legislature approves the request, which rarely happens. The voting restrictions were included in the state's constitution after an 1890 convention in which delegates eliminated the right to vote for people convicted of felonies thought to be "Black crimes," a perception based largely on which crimes were prosecuted. The issue in the previous challenge the Supreme Court declined to consider was whether the 'taint' of a Jim Crow-era law could be 'cured' by later amendments that removed burglary from the list of crimes and added murder and rape. This time, the issue was whether the restrictions violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments, and whether the Supreme Court's 1974 decision prevents a challenge.
