Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
USA Presidential voters on electoral college map

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Federalism at Its Best

​People arrive at a polling location on the first day of early voting in Texas

Early voting records should scare GOP

​Border patrol SUV

How Border Policies Are Reshaping South Texas Politics

Five men sitting on one side of a table, as a panel at an event.

Congressional Inaction Raises Constitutional Change Alternative

U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN)

Trump’s Plan to Strip Rep. Omar of Her Citizenship Is Unconstitutional and a Threat to All of Us

Convictions block too many from voting and jobs, Civil Rights Commission says

The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumJun 13, 2019
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

Felony convictions can haunt people long after they've served their time, limiting access to everything from voting rights to housing. A report out Wednesday from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission says these "collateral consequences" have too much impact on convicts after they have reentered society.

More than 620,000 are released from prisons each year and are then subject to a variety of "invisible punishments" limiting their opportunities and rights. Many of those, the commission concluded, have nothing to do with the crimes committed.

"When the collateral consequences are unrelated in this way, their imposition generally negatively affects public safety and the public good," Commission Chair Catherine Lhamon wrote in a letter to President Trump and Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The commission's majority offered eight recommendations, including:

  • Public safety should be the focus of any collateral consequences.
  • Laws should be reviewed to ensure they effectively reduce recidivism and protect the community.
  • Restrictions on food stamps should be eliminated and restrictions on public housing limited.
  • Nonviolent criminal records should eventually be sealed from public view.

The report cited the decision by Florida voters last year to restore voting rights to felons as a prime example of countermanding such collateral consequences. But the report was finalized before the Republican-run state Legislature passed a measure creating hurdles for felons registering including paying all restitution, court costs and fines. GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to soon sign the bill.


Latest news

Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection
Rule of Law

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Mahatma Gandhi addressing some of his thousands of followers on a lawn.
Democracy

Everyone Wants Peace. That’s the Problem.

Smoke hangs over the city against a twilight sky following an explosion during an air raid alert on October 2, 2026 in Kyiv, Ukraine
Governance & Legislation

Axis of Aggressors: How Four U.S. Adversaries Strengthen Each Other

Read More

news video camera
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

When the Cameras Went Dark: What a Press Ban Reveals About American Journalism

When I came to the United States from India in 1982, I did not trust newspapers. Back home, everyone knew which party a paper favored before reading a line. American television felt different. My family watched Peter Jennings every evening, and later I found Larry King on CNN, who let his guests talk instead of telling viewers what to think. That habit of holding everyone to one standard has mostly faded.

On Sept. 18, President Trump announced he was banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, saying their reporting was fake news. The next morning the Secret Service took reporters’ badges at the gate. The outlets sued on Monday, and Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS declined to take CNN’s turn in the television pool. On Sept. 24, Judge Timothy Kelly, whom Trump appointed, blocked the ban for 14 days. He found the outlets likely to win on due process, because reporters got no notice and no chance to respond, and he doubted the government’s national security explanation. Trump’s answer was to call the judge “totally disloyal.”

Keep ReadingShow less
US Senate candidate Dan Osborn

Nebraska Independent US Senate candidate Dan Osborn.

Image obtained from YouTube

7 Independent Campaigns to Watch in the Final Days of the Midterms

Election Day on November 3, here are the seven independent campaigns we’ve followed closely, four for the Senate and three for the House, ranked by how competitive they are.

Fundraising figures are full-cycle totals from FEC reports, through the date noted for each race. Prediction-market odds come from Kalshi and were pulled on 10/23. Polls are pulled from the aggregated New York Times pages, with several low-quality polls highlighted by campaigns left out.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Patriotic paper ballot featuring red and blue stripes with the word vote

Patriotic paper ballot featuring red and blue stripes with the word vote inserted into a grey cardboard ballot box slot.

Getty Images

The First Amendment Does Not Belong to Political Parties

In a recent essay in Life & Liberty, Robert G. Natelson argues that open primaries may violate the First Amendment rights of political parties by allowing people who are not party members to participate in choosing their nominees. His argument starts with the rights of the party. The more fundamental question is whether it starts in the right place at all: When a state conducts a primary election, whose rights are we even talking about?

Natelson’s answer is primarily the rights of political parties. He argues that because parties have a First Amendment right to decide with whom they associate, the government cannot require them to allow people who are not party members to participate in choosing their nominees. He relies on a number of Supreme Court decisions involving political parties and places particular weight on National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC. But in doing so, he moves too quickly past the most important fact in the debate: a state primary is an election conducted by the government, not a private meeting of a political organization.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media

White House communications aide Danielle Alvarez (R) films with her phone as U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media as he departs on the South Lawn of the White House on October 23, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Trump’s Arch Plan Defies Law and Warps D.C.’s Historic Core

The Trump Arch construction controversy is the latest vanity project by Donald Trump using taxpayer money without Congressional approval, placing his ego-based physical stamp on not only American historical architecture but also the American psyche. With no good reason for constructing this arch, it’s an act of self-aggrandizement meant to make him look powerful and important. The project is unconstitutional, illegal, and patently un-American. Three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian have also filed a lawsuit against it.

Like all other actors in government, executive agencies, like the National Park Service, must follow the rule of law and respect ‘separation of powers’ established by the U.S. Constitution. This means following the laws enacted by Congress, which has the power to distribute public funds and determine how they are spent, not the Executive Branch, including the President.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026