Literature Review
Introduction
Currently, ex-felons in the United States are not allowed to participate in elections after they serve their time in prison. These laws imposed on ex-felons post-conviction pose a serious problem. There are several rational arguments that support the imposing of felony disenfranchisement laws. However, there is an obvious gap in the literature on felony disenfranchisement laws after a felon has served their time from the point of view of the ex-felon. As such, this qualitative phenomenological study explores the impacts of felony disenfranchisement from the perspective of the ex-felon after they have served time in prison. The main sections in this chapter include exploring the various strategies that will be used to obtain literature, the theoretical framework, a background on felony disenfranchisement, and a review of the literature. The theoretical foundation for this study will be Becker’s Theory of Labelling. The background will include a detailed description of the historical origins of felony disenfranchisement as well as the current climate surrounding the felony disenfranchisement policy outlook.
Literature Search Strategy
For this study, literature will be searched through Walden Library databases and Google Scholar using the following search terms: definition of felony disenfranchisement, history of felony disenfranchisement, Jim crow laws, voting poll taxes, consequences of voting bans, consequences of felony disenfranchisement, felony disenfranchisement by state, felony disenfranchisement laws, ex-felon, voting restrictions, restoration of voting after a felony conviction, labeling theory, U.S. Constitution. Current dissertations on felony disenfranchisement, labeling theory, inmate-voting rights. Books, government websites, and reports were also reviewed.
Background
In the United States, felony disenfranchisement is losing one’s right to vote after a felony conviction. It is usually imposed on all felons (currently incarcerated) and ex-felons (completed their sentences). Apart from penal sanctions such as imprisonment and fines, offenders may suffer other civil consequences which include losing one’s right to vote, right to hold public office, serve on a jury, and other consequences that are experienced long after they (offenders) have served their time in jail. This action (disenfranchisement) is borrowed from ancient Greek and Roman traditions. In those days, serious offenders would suffer “civil death” This entailed deprivation of all their rights, their property would be confiscated, they would be exposed to injury and even to death (Harvard Law Review, 1937). According to Payne (2017), after blacks in America were granted the right to vote, the Southern opposition tried to use numerous race-neutral voting barriers, which were purposefully meant to keep as many black people from being able to vote. Criminal disenfranchisement was among these measures put in place. It is important to note that such laws already existed in the Southern States. However, according to Shapiro (1993), these states tailored their criminal disenfranchisement laws together with their voting qualifications, in order to increase the effect of these laws on blacks.
Literature Review
The primary theoretical framework for this literature review is Howard Becker’s (1973) labeling theory. Becker’s most famous book, Outsiders (1973), viewed deviance as the cultural product of interactions between people whose occupations involved either committing crimes or catching criminals.
Labelling Theory
The theory claims that people in power create crime by labeling some behaviors as inappropriate. It is important to note that some efforts to reduce criminal activity such as rehabilitation are aimed at helping the offenders; they may cause offenders to lean more towards crime-filled lives because of the labels that are assigned to them. The more these individuals are treated on the basis of their labels, the more they begin to accept these labels. When individuals engage in behavior that is deemed inappropriate, society labels them as deviant. With time, the individuals internalize and accept this label. In the theory, Becker groups behavior into four categories: falsely accused, conforming, pure deviant, and secret deviant. The falsely accused are people who engage in obedient behavior but are perceived as deviant. Conforming are the individuals who engage in obedient behavior that is viewed as such. The pure deviant are those that engage in deviant behavior that is viewed as such. Finally, the secret deviant are individuals who engage in deviant behavior but are not labeled as deviant by society.
Conceptual Framework
Numerous studies have been carried out to try to point out the harms of felony disenfranchisement. Felony disenfranchisement threatens public policy and safety. A 2011 study by Hamilton-Smith and Vogel (2011) showed how continued isolation from poverty and violence against ex-felons who were in the process of reintegrating into society without participating in the democratic process hinders their efforts to become law-abiding citizens. In addition, Robison & Sarahne (2019) argue that disenfranchisement is closely linked with the recurrence of criminal activity among ex-felons.
Current Climate Surrounding Criminal Disenfranchisement
Currently, in the United States, ex-felons are the only adult population that is disenfranchisement from voting. However, over the last 25 years, a light has been shone on the injustice that is felony disenfranchisement. Various policies have started to be put in place in favor of restoring the constitutional rights of the disenfranchised and underrepresented groups. However, according to Stern (2017), policies on felony disenfranchisement have not sought to protect everyone especially those already imprisoned. A major reason for this would be the fact that convicted offenders would make choices that would undermine legal authoritarian establishments as well as the interests of law-abiding citizens.
Summary and Conclusions
Felony disenfranchisement is clearly undemocratic and has historically been used to disadvantage one community: the African American community. Southern states tailored their criminal disenfranchisement laws as well as their voting qualifications to disadvantage the blacks as they were already opposed to the African American community being allowed to vote. The Labelling theory tries to explain why criminal activity is seen in individuals. It stipulates that people who engage in behavior that is deemed deviant by society are given labels that they subconsciously accept hence continue to act according to these labels. Studies have shown that felony disenfranchisement has negatives effects as it enhances the rate of crime recurrence among ex-felons. Finally, there has been some progress made in trying to give these groups their right to vote although there are many hurdles in the process.
References
Civil Death Statutes. Medieval Fiction in a Modern World. (1937). Harvard Law Review, 50(6), 968-977. doi:10.2307/1332815
Shapiro, A. (1993). Challenging Criminal Disenfranchisement under the Voting Rights Act: A New Strategy. The Yale Law Journal, 103(2), 537-566. doi:10.2307/797104
Hamilton-Smith, G. P., & Vogel, M. (2011). The Ballot as a Bulwark: The Impact of Felony Disenfranchisement on Recidivism. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1919617
Payne, B. J. (2017). Defending Black Suffrage: Poll Taxes, Preachers, and Anti-Prohibition in Texas, 1887–1916. Journal of Southern History, 83(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2017.0243
Robinson, P. H., & Sarahne, M. (2019). After the Crime: Rewarding Offenders’ Positive Post-Offense Conduct. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3433812
Becker, H. (1973). Outsiders : studies in the sociology of deviance. Free Press.
Stern, W. (2017). Criminal disenfranchisement: 21st century America’s suffrage crisis. The Badger Herald. https://badgerherald.com/opinion/2017/10/02/criminal-disenfranchisement-21st-century-americas-suffrage-crisis/