Overturn strange decision
Published 3:33 pm Wednesday, January 6, 2010
When Congress passed and President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act in 1965, they were seeking to stop relentless efforts by states and localities, mostly in the South, to keep African-American and other minority citizens from casting ballots.
In a gross misapplication of that historic act, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that it applies to the voting rights of convicted felons. In a 2-1 decision, the panel said that Washington’s Constitution cannot keep felons from voting because the state’s criminal-justice system is biased against minorities.
Even if the latter assertion is true, as University of Washington research presented by plaintiffs in the 14-year-old case suggests, connecting it to the Voting Rights Act is a monumental reach. Attorney General Rob McKenna announced Wednesday that he’ll appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, as he should.
If minorities are still being disproportionately and unfairly arrested, tried and convicted of crimes in Washington, we have a serious problem that needs addressing. A fresh, empirical look should be taken, followed by appropriate action.
But restoring felon voting rights, which the state Constitution rightly suspends, is hardly a logical response. Indeed, federal courts have ruled the opposite way over the past five years in cases from Florida, New York and Massachusetts. Judge M. Margaret McKeown noted that fact in a sharply worded dissent from Tuesday’s ruling.
The loss of voting rights is an entirely appropriate consequence for committing a serious crime. All but two states require it. In Washington, once felons satisfy their sentence, including any community supervision requirements, they can apply to have their voting rights restored — part of the process of reintegrating into the community and becoming a productive member of it.
Last year, the Legislature even made it easier, allowing former inmates to apply for voting rights even if they still have court-ordered financial obligations. Completion of the process serves as a reward for former convicts who resolve to play by the rules of society. It’s reasonable, rational and fair.
Racial discrimination is wrong, period. Society must always work to eliminate it. This case indicates Washington’s criminal justice system has work to do on that score.
Two Circuit Court judges, though, have drawn a line between wrong and remedy that makes no sense. The Supreme Court should take the case, and overturn this strange decision.
