Site logo

Prometheus 6

All respect and no restraint

Passing disenfrancising laws should easily count as moral turpitude...whatever THAT is...

In Birmingham, the Jefferson County registrar, Nell Hunter, also named in the suit, said, “We’ve put everybody back on.”

“All of those that didn’t involve moral turpitude were put back on,” Ms. Hunter said.

Makes you wonder why they came off in the first place if it was that easy to fix, don't it?

At issue in the lawsuit is not the list enacted in law but an expanded “moral turpitude” list developed by the state’s attorney general, Troy King, in 2005. That list includes about a dozen additional offenses, most of them nonviolent, and several including the sale of marijuana.

The A.C.L.U. contends that the attorney general’s list violates the Alabama Constitution, saying only the Legislature can decide what crimes fit the “moral turpitude” category. Georgia, by contrast, bars those convicted of moral turpitude from voting but promulgates no list of crimes fitting that definition. A.C.L.U. officials say that results in a “blanket” policy of disenfranchisement.

A.C.L.U. Sues Alabama on Ballot Access
By ADAM NOSSITER

The American Civil Liberties Union sued Alabama elections officials Monday over what it says is an overly expansive policy disenfranchising felons, amid concern from voting rights groups nationwide that voting lists are being culled with too great alacrity by many states.

Like virtually all states, Alabama restricts the rights of many felons to vote, but in Monday’s suit the group contends the state is going beyond even its own laws. People convicted of nonviolent offenses like income tax evasion or forgery are at risk of being turned away by voter registrars in Alabama, the A.C.L.U. says.

Alabama does not bar all felons from voting, only those convicted of crimes involving “moral turpitude.” In 2003, the civil liberties group says, the State Legislature clearly defined what those crimes are: murder, rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, incest, sexual torture and nine other crimes mainly involving pornography and abuses against children.

At issue in the lawsuit is not the list enacted in law but an expanded “moral turpitude” list developed by the state’s attorney general, Troy King, in 2005. That list includes about a dozen additional offenses, most of them nonviolent, and several including the sale of marijuana.

The A.C.L.U. contends that the attorney general’s list violates the Alabama Constitution, saying only the Legislature can decide what crimes fit the “moral turpitude” category. Georgia, by contrast, bars those convicted of moral turpitude from voting but promulgates no list of crimes fitting that definition. A.C.L.U. officials say that results in a “blanket” policy of disenfranchisement.

Across the nation, about 5.3 million people cannot vote because of their convictions, according to a 2004 estimate by the Sentencing Project, a nonprofit research group supporting more liberal sentencing and voting policies. Voting rights groups are especially watchful this year because under a 2002 federal law, states are now coordinating lists to find felons and people who have died or moved, allowing easy — rights groups say too easy — purging of voters.

Although the A.C.L.U. is uncertain how many Alabama voters might run afoul of the attorney general’s 2005 expansive definition, “we think it is a lot,” said Laughlin McDonald, director of its Voting Rights Project.

My position is simple:

My position is simple: everyone who has completely served their time and paid all fines should automatically have their voting RIGHTS restored, without having to go through any red tape or judges and regardless of the type of crime. Believe it or not there are many people - more than we realize or care to admit - who do there time, leave prison become productive citizens.

This site best viewed with a jaundiced eye