Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It remains the government's view that the right to vote goes to the essence of the offender's relationship with democratic society, and the removal of the right to vote in the case of some convicted prisoners can be a proportionate and proper response following conviction and imprisonment.
Some argue that felons have shown poor judgment, and that they should therefore not have a voice in the political decision-making process. [4] Opponents have argued that such disfranchisement restricts and conflicts with principles of universal suffrage. [5] It can affect civic and communal participation in general. [1]
The right to vote is the foundation of any democracy. Chief Justice Earl Warren, for example, wrote in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964): "The right to vote freely for the candidate of one's choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government ...
Two guest authors weigh in on both sides of the issue voters will decide on Election Day. | Opinion
If Washington enacts HB 2030, it would join only Maine, Vermont and the District of Columbia in allowing prisoners to vote. Advocates say voting should be an inalienable right, regardless of ...
The Republican-led push has created a world in which Missourians across the state are gearing up for what could be two of the state’s most consequential statewide votes related to abortion ...
The Voting Eligibility (Prisoners) Bill was drafted to give Members of Parliament three options on which to vote. Option 1 would retain the ban for prisoners jailed for over four years. Option 2 would retain the ban for prisoners jailed for over six months. Option 3 would retain the current ban with minor amendments.
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that convicted felons could be barred from voting beyond their sentence and parole without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.