Loss of rights due to conviction for criminal offense

Loss of rights due to felony conviction takes many forms. In the United States this includes disenfranchisement, exclusion from Jury duty, and loss of the right to possess firearms.

United States

Disenfranchisement

In the USA, every state with the exception of Maine and Vermont prohibits felons from voting while in prison.[1] Nine other states disenfranchise felons for various lengths of time following the completion of their probation or parole. However, the severity of each state's disenfranchisement varies. 1 in 43 adults were disenfranchised as of 2006.[2] The issue of disenfranchisement gained awareness in 2000 after the "excruciatingly close" election, wherein 2% of the voting-age population was prohibited from participating.[2] In that election, George W. Bush won Florida by 537 votes, however 31% of black Floridians were denied the vote due to disenfranchisement.[3] Given that African American voters are typically Democratic voters, it was argued at the time that their exclusion "decisively" changed the outcome of the election.

In Reynolds v. Sims, the Court ruled that the right to vote is a “fundamental right,” establishing a strict scrutiny test. Further, the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees “equal protection of the laws” to all persons. However, Section 2 of this Amendment allows states to remove voting privileges from anyone who has participated in “rebellion or other crime.”[2] A 1972 SCOTUS ruling found that this article applied to disenfranchisement of ex-felons. The Civic Participation and Rehabilitation Act, allowing for ex-felons to vote, has been introduced at the beginning of every legislative session since 1994, but has never made it to the floor of Congress.

Two states, Kentucky and Florida (Gov. Rick Scott reverted to the old policy in 2010 that had been changed by Gov. Charlie Crist), continue to impose a lifelong denial of the right to vote to all citizens with a felony record, in the absence of a restoration of civil rights by the Governor or, where allowed, state legislature.[1] Florida law is somewhat unique, in that the individual must be pardoned by the Governor and a majority of the publicly elected State Cabinet (with the Governor's vote being the tiebreaker, if necessary).

Felon jury exclusion

The lifetime exclusion of felons from jury service is the majority rule in the U.S., used in thirty one states and in federal courts. The result is that over 6% of the adult population is excluded, including about 30% of black men,[4] creating a class of citizens defined and punished by the criminal justice system but unable to impact its function. Felon jury exclusion is less visible than felony disenfranchisement, and few socio-legal scholars have challenged the statutes that withhold a convicted felon’s opportunity to sit on a jury.[5] While constitutional challenges to felon jury exclusion almost always originate from interested litigants, some scholars contend that "it is the interests of the excluded felons that are most directly implicated."

Yet attacks on these blanket prohibitions levied by excluded felon jurors have failed consistently. The United States Supreme Court does not recognize the right to sit on a jury as fundamental.[6] It has been pointed out that, although lawmakers assert that felon jury exclusion measures protect the integrity of the adjudicative process, as felons “lack the requisite probity” to serve on a jury and are “inherently biased,” many of the states subscribing to this practice allow felons to practice law.[7] But that is a double-standard only if it is presumed that those who judge the arguments of both sides in a case are allowed to be as biased as those arguing for each side.

The U.S. Department of Justice has argued that felon jury exclusion laws do not discriminate against the disabled because there is no evidence that drug addicts as a class are convicted of felonies in any greater number than other classes of felons.[8]

Loss of right to possess firearms

Felons are regarded by the federal government, and most US states, as being "prohibited persons" under US law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)). It is a class C felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. This has been litigated before the Supreme Court. However, the Court upheld the regulation.

In other countries

Canada

An equivalent, under the country's Criminal Code, to a felony, is an indictable offence. Any person convicted of an indictable offence may lose some privileges, such as the ability to (depending on the circumstances):

Any person convicted of an indictable offence in which he or she used, or threatened to use, a weapon will lose the ability to own or use any weapon for a certain period of time, if not permanently.

The ability to obtain a driver's licence can also be lost, in some cases, for a very long time (if not permanently), upon conviction for certain indictable criminal driving offences, among them:

Any non-citizen (whether a temporary or permanent resident) can, after serving a custodial sentence for an indictable offence, be ordered removed from Canada, and will have to, if removed from Canada, successfully be deemed rehabilitated or apply for rehabilitation, to be able to re-enter the country. Generally, any non-citizen convicted of a Criminal Code offence to which he or she was sentenced to life imprisonment will be permanently barred from entering Canada after being deported.

United Kingdom

Within the UK, criminal law is primarily a matter of the four constituent countries. Like in Canada, the term "indictable offence" is used in lieu of "felony". After a conviction for an indictable offence, an offender can, in some cases, lose:

See also

References

  1. 1 2 "Felony Disenfranchisement Laws in the United States" (pdf). The Sentencing Project. September 2008.
  2. 1 2 3 Hull, Elizabeth (2009). The Disenfranchisement of Ex-Felons. Temple University Press. p. 83. ISBN 1439904413.
  3. ↑ "Florida's legacy of voter disenfranchisement - World Socialist Web Site". www.wsws.org. Retrieved 2015-12-13.
  4. ↑ Kalt, Brian C. (October 2003), The Exclusion of Felons from Jury Service 53, American University Law Review
  5. ↑ Binnall, James Michael (March 20, 2010), A jury of none: an essay on the last acceptable form of civic banishment, Dialectical Anthropology, ISSN 0304-4092
  6. ↑ Binnall James M. (Fall 2009), Sixteen Million Angry Men, Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law
  7. ↑ Binnall, James (May 25, 2009), The Lawyer and the Juror: Critically Examining the Rationales for Felon Jury Exclusion
  8. ↑ http://www.justice.gov/crt/foia/lofc026.txt
  9. ↑ Greenhouse, Linda (July 29, 2010). "Voting Behind Bars". The New York Times.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Saturday, April 23, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.