Nebraska Supreme Court Upholds Voting Rights for Felons, Opening Doors for Thousands Ahead of Presidential Election
In a landmark decision on Wednesday, the Nebraska Supreme Court upheld a state law that allows felons who have completed their sentences to vote, paving the way for thousands of individuals to participate in the upcoming November 5 US presidential election. This ruling comes after a contentious legal battle initiated by two Nebraskans with felony records, who challenged Secretary of State Robert Evnen’s attempts to block their voter registration.
The court’s ruling rejected Evnen’s claims that the law, passed in April, violated the state constitution. Instead, the justices ordered him to implement the law immediately, emphasizing the importance of adhering to state statutes. Justice Lindsey Miller-Lerman, in a concurring opinion, highlighted the dangers of allowing state employees to disregard laws based on personal beliefs, asking, "Do we want to live in a world where every state employee who has a hunch a statute is flawed gets to ignore it?"
Before this new law, Nebraska had a two-decade-long policy that permitted felons to vote only two years after completing their sentences. However, Evnen, citing an opinion from Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, had directed election officials to deny voter registration to felons, claiming that only the Board of Pardons had the authority to restore voting rights. This decision sparked outrage and led to the ACLU stepping in to defend the rights of those affected.
Following the court’s ruling, Evnen stated that his office would comply and had already instructed election officials to begin registering felons to vote. Jonathan Topaz, a lawyer with the ACLU, expressed relief at the decision, stating, "We are grateful the Nebraska Supreme Court invalidated this lawless attempt to reinstate permanent felony disenfranchisement."
The implications of this ruling are significant, especially considering that nearly half of US states impose some form of voting restrictions on felons, often disproportionately affecting Black and Latino communities. Critics argue that such laws perpetuate systemic inequalities and disenfranchise individuals who have already paid their debt to society.
While Nebraska may only have five electoral votes in the presidential election, its unique system of dividing those votes among geographic districts means that it could play a crucial role in a tightly contested race. The district that includes Omaha, the state’s largest city, could serve as a pivotal tiebreaker, making the inclusion of more voters all the more important.
Interestingly, Nebraska’s decision aligns with broader trends in the Midwest. Just a few months ago, Minnesota’s top court upheld a similar law, while a federal appeals court upheld Mississippi’s controversial lifetime voting ban for certain felonies, illustrating the ongoing national debate over voting rights for felons.
As Nebraska prepares for the upcoming election, the court’s decision not only restores voting rights to thousands but also sends a clear message about the importance of inclusivity in the democratic process. With the stakes higher than ever, every vote will count, and the voices of those previously silenced are finally being heard.
