As Reuters, Democracy Docket, the Star Tribune and other sources report the Minnesota Supreme Court has upheld the state law that allows felons freed from incarceration to vote, even though they may still be under supervised release, probation or work release.
The decision for A23-1940 Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al., Appellants, vs. Tom Hunt, et al., can be read online here.
Via the Rochester Post Bulletin, Reuters' Joseph Ax reports in Minnesota court upholds Walz-backed law restoring felons' right to vote:
The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a law, signed last year by Governor Tim Walz who is now the Democratic vice presidential candidate, that restores the right to vote for felons who have completed their prison terms.
The court's unanimous ruling did not address the merits of the law, instead finding that the group that had challenged the law, the Minnesota Voters Alliance, did not have the legal standing to do so.
The alliance — a conservative group that argued the law violated the state constitution — and its legal team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The law in question allows felons to vote once they've been released from prison, even if they remain on parole or probation. Incarcerated felons are not permitted to cast ballots in Minnesota.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's campaign criticized Walz on Tuesday for supporting the law, even though Trump was convicted of 34 felonies in New York this year for falsifying business records to cover up a hush-money payment to a porn star. . . .
There's that.
Democracy Docket's Rachel Selzer reports in Law Restoring Voting Rights to 55,000 Minnesotans With Felony Convictions Upheld by State Supreme Court:
The Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously upheld a 2023 state law that restores voting rights to 55,000 Minnesotans on parole, probation or community release due to a felony conviction.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, whom Vice President Kamala Harris announced yesterday as her running mate, signed the legislation last March.
In today’s ruling, the state’s highest court rejected a bid from a right-wing organization known as the Minnesota Voters Alliance to invalidate the historic rights restoration legislation for allegedly violating the state constitution.
The justices specifically concluded that the Minnesota Voters Alliance, which sued alongside Minnesota residents, lacked standing to challenge to the law, but did not address the merits of the organization’s arguments.
Under the re-enfranchisement statute enacted by the state’s Democratic-controlled Legislature last summer, voting rights were restored to Minnesotans with felony convictions immediately after release from incarceration.
Prior to the law’s enactment, those with felony convictions were permitted to regain their voting rights only after the completion of their entire sentences, which often include years- or decades-long periods of probation. This felony disenfranchisement scheme disproportionately impacted people of color by denying voting rights to nearly 4.5% of Black adults and more than 8% of Native American adults living in Minnesota.
According to the Minnesota Voters Alliance’s lawsuit, individuals on supervised release, probation or work release because of a felony conviction have “not been restored to all civil rights” and are therefore ineligible to regain voting rights until they are fully discharged from their sentences. The group also claimed the law unlawfully authorizes the use of taxpayer funds to educate and notify people about the new voting rights restoration scheme.
A Minnesota trial court held last year that the organization lacked standing and rebuffed as “fundamentally flawed” the main premise of its legal challenge — that individuals must regain “all civil rights” as a prerequisite to having their voting rights restored.
Minnesota officials — including Secretary of State Steve Simon (D) — referred to the lawsuit as an attempt to “disenfranchise more than 55,000 Minnesotans” in a brief defending the law before the state Supreme Court. . . .
Read the entire article at Democracy Docket, which calls itself "the leading digital news platform dedicated to information, analysis and opinion about voting rights and elections in the courts."
Closer to the court chambers in St. Paul, Rochelle Olson reports for the Star Tribune in Minnesota Supreme Court upholds law restoring voting rights to felons upon release from incarceration:
A conservative nonprofit challenged the 2023 law passed by the DFL and signed by Gov. Tim Walz.
The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously upheld the year-old law restoring the right to vote to felons upon their release from incarceration.
In an opinion written by Chief Justice Natalie Hudson, the court rejected a challenge to the 2023 law by the Minnesota Voters Alliance. The Anoka County District Court had dismissed the lawsuit and the alliance asked the high court earlier this year to reinstate its challenge.
The decision focused on the issue of legal standing and whether the alliance was in a position to sue. The courts said the alliance didn’t have the right to sue simply because taxpayer money was used to implement the law. The court’s ruling didn’t address the substance of the law because the challenge didn’t get that far.
In late 2023, Anoka County Judge Thomas Lehmann dismissed the lawsuit. Then the state Supreme Court took up the case on expedited review, bypassing the Court of Appeals.
During oral arguments on April 1, Assistant Attorney General Nathan Hartshorn asked the court to uphold Lehmann’s dismissal and issue an opinion in support of the law.
The timing was critical because early voting has already begun and this year’s primary is next week. An estimated 57,000 felons are newly eligible to vote. Those Minnesotans “need to hear from this court whether they’re taking their freedom into their hands by casting a ballot,” Hartshorn said. . . .
Before the new law, those who had been convicted of felonies couldn’t vote until they were off probation and had paid all fines related to their convictions, which for some could take years or decades. Supporters said the right to vote helps newly released felons become invested in their communities and more successful in their rehabilitation.
The change had broad support among DFLers, including Attorney General Keith Ellison, who had been pushing it for two decades. Secretary of State Steve Simon has been conducting a statewide education campaign about the change.
Some Republicans, however, objected to the new law, saying it would disproportionately help DFL candidates. They also argued that losing the ability to vote was a consequence of breaking the law.
The legality of felon voting rights has been before the state Supreme Court prominently in recent years. In February 2023, the court said that barring felons from voting was constitutional. Even before the court ruling, legislators were moving to “Restore the Vote” and Gov. Tim Walz was supportive. . . .
Read Olson's piece at the Strib.
Governor Walz was busy outside of the state today, but Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison's office emailed the following press release on the decision:
Attorney General Ellison successfully defends Restore the Vote Act
Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously rejects attempt to disenfranchise Minnesotans
August 7, 2024 (SAINT PAUL) — In a unanimous decision today, the Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit challenging the Restore the Vote Act, which restored voting rights to about 55,000 people. As a result of the decision, the Act remains the law. People who are living in the community serving a felony sentence while on probation, supervised release, or parole have the right to vote. Early voting for Minnesota’s August 13 primary elections is already underway, and early voting for the November 5 general election begins September 20.
“Democracy is not guaranteed — it is earned by protecting and expanding it,” Attorney General Ellison said. “Today, the Minnesota Supreme Court protected the right of 55,000 Minnesotans to participate in our democracy, so today, our democracy is stronger. I’m proud my Office successfully represented Secretary Simon against this baseless challenge, and I’m proud Restore the Vote is definitively the law of the land today more than 20 years after I first proposed it as a state legislator. I encourage all Minnesotans who are eligible to vote to do so and to take full part in our democracy.”
"Today’s decision is great news for voters,” said Secretary of State Steve Simon. “With Minnesotans already voting ahead of the August 13 Primary and making a plan to vote in the November 5 Presidential Election, it is critically important that every voter understands their rights. The Restore the Vote Act remains the law of the land. If you are not currently incarcerated, a U.S. citizen, at least 18 years old, and a resident of Minnesota for 20 days, and have not had your rights to vote revoked by a court – you can vote in Minnesota. Special thanks to the Office of Attorney General Keith Ellison for its strong defense of this law.”
Background
Until 2023, Minnesota law required those convicted of a felony to complete their sentence before automatically regaining the right to vote, even if they were living in their communities (on parole or in another similar program). In a 2023 case, the Minnesota Supreme Court recognized the legislature’s broad authority to restore voting rights. Just weeks after that decision, the Minnesota Legislature enacted the Restore the Vote Act, which automatically restores voting rights when a person is released into the community, even if the sentence is not complete.
Lawsuit
Shortly after its enactment, a self-described “election integrity” organization and three of its members challenged the Restore the Vote Act. The challengers, none of whom had their voting rights affected by the Act, alleged that the Minnesota Constitution, which authorizes people with felony convictions to vote if “restored to civil rights,” prohibited the legislature from restoring only voting rights.
The district court dismissed the lawsuit, reasoning that the premise of the challengers’ argument was “fundamentally flawed.” The court held that nothing suggested that the right to vote could not be restored before a felony sentence was discharged. Noting that nothing in the Restore the Vote Act affected the challengers’ voting rights, the court also concluded that they lacked standing, a legal requirement that a person must have suffered an injury to bring a lawsuit.
Today the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the challengers could not “manufacture standing” when they did not claim any injury from the re-enfranchisement of others.
Bluestem hopes that settles that.
Photo: Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon hands out "I plan to vote" stickers as newly enfranchised voters register to vote in St. Paul on Thursday, June 1, 2023. Alex Derosier / Forum News Service.Via post Bulletin.
Related posts
- The 2023 MN Legislature did a lot on election laws. Here’s a (nearly) comprehensive look.
- HF342: Willmar mayor shares support for Justice 4 All at local League of Women Voters meeting
- Andy Parrish trolls twitter about "ex-con" voting but doesn't know essentials of Minnesota law
- Max Hailperin points out more Crockett ignorance on voting in Minnesota
- MN Reformer opinion: Max Hailperin writes MN tradition of one-stop voting must be protected
- Income, geography, and the amendments: A look at the association between income and voting
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm also on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments