Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

5 million were denied a ballot in 2020, but it can (and must) be fewer next time

John Legend and Desmond Meade

Desmond Meade (right, with songwriter John Legend) led the movement to overturn Florida's felon disenfranchisement law in 2018.

Zak Bennett/AFP via Getty Images

Lang is a co-director of the voting rights program of the Campaign Legal Center, an advocacy and litigation nonprofit that works to reduce the influence of money in politics and to support unrestricted access to the ballot.


More Americans voted last year — both as a share of the eligible population and in raw numbers — than in any presidential election since 1900, when the "eligible population" looked quite different. Despite the pandemic and stubborn voting restrictions imposed by cynical politicians, nearly 160 million Americans registered their voices in a historic showing of the value we place in our democracy.

But in at least one way, the "eligible population" still looked far too much like it did at the start of the last century: Approximately 5 million Americans were locked out of the process due to criminal convictions.

Indeed, the early 1900s saw the dramatic expansion of criminal disenfranchisement laws as part of the post-Reconstruction project to disenfranchise Black Americans. Too many of these Jim Crow laws remain on the books today — and given the disparities in our modern criminal justice system, achieve the same goal.

But just as the voters of 2020 demonstrated their commitment to our democracy by showing up at the ballot box, in 2021 they are continuing to fight for the right to participate.

And in a season that has already produced plenty of bad news for voting rights in the statehouses, restoration of rights for people with convictions is a notable bright spot. Indeed, this year we are likely to come closer than ever to universal suffrage for American citizens.

In the past two decades, the formerly incarcerated and their allies have pursued a tireless fight for recognition as full citizens. And while it's not easy to demand policy change without the lever of the franchise at your disposal, they have achieved remarkable progress through grit, persistence and the benefit of the moral high ground.

The Sentencing Project says 23 states expanded their right to vote between 1997 and 2018, enfranchising approximately 1.4 million. Then the movement had a watershed moment. Led by the intrepid Desmond Meade, Floridians in 2018 overturned the country's harshest felony disenfranchisement law by approving Amendment 4, which promised to re-enfranchise nearly as many Americans as the prior two decades of advocacy combined. The march continued the past two years. Nevada, New Jersey, California and Colorado have the vote for all but those in prison. Arizona eliminated some financial barriers to the franchise. Governors in New York, Iowa and Kentucky took executive action to expand such rights. And the District of Columbia started moving to eliminate felony disenfranchisement altogether.

There has also been a bruising defeat. The Florida Legislature stripped the power from Amendment 4 by requiring would-be voters to first pay every fine, fee and surcharge imposed at sentencing. Given that our society often buries indigent criminal defendants in debt they cannot possibly pay, this law is estimated to lock out between 775,000 and 900,000 Floridians from their polling places simply because they cannot afford to pay.

Advocates sued, and at trial persuaded a federal judge the law was nothing more than a modern-day poll tax. But that victory was taken away in September, when the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the financial barriers in a 6-5 decision along partisan lines. This leaves the litigation landscape looking bleak, particularly for challenging similar laws in other states.

So why the rosy outlook for this year? Because while the courts may not have not gotten the memo — that our democracy works best when everyone can participate — Americans have.

The appeals court ruling led to an outpouring of outrage and accompanying donations, helping the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition pay off the debts of many potential voters before November. And in 2021, the legislative docket is chock full of good news for the voting rights of people with felony convictions.

Democrats now in control of Congress have prioritized their sweeping democracy reform bill, dubbed HR 1 in the House and S 1 in the Senate. It would re-enfranchise all Americans with convictions after their incarceration. But regardless of that measure's fate, more than 90 rights restoration bills have been introduced this year in 20 state legislatures. Only three bills have been proposed to take felony disenfranchisement in the opposite direction, and none is likely to pass.

In Oregon, lawmakers have made moves to end disenfranchisement altogether. In five other states, prospects are good for legislation restoring the right to vote immediately after incarceration. In New York and Virginia, the bills would replace discretionary and often confusing executive powers. In Connecticut and Washington, the bills would eliminate explicit requirements for paying fines and fees. But all the legislation (new Mexico is the fifth state) would eliminate the de facto poll tax created by requirements for completion of parole and probation, given the common link between supervision and payment of fines and fees.

The progress is particularly inspiring in Virginia. For decades it permanently disenfranchised all people with convictions, unless they could obtain a pardon. In 2016 Gov. Terry McAuliffe used his executive power to restore rights to all who completed their sentences, a policy maintained by his successor, fellow Democrat Ralph Northam. While a big step forward, that still disenfranchised all on parole or probation. Now the General Assembly is debating whether to restore the franchise upon release from prison — completing a potential sea change in fewer than five years

While all the states named so far are "blue," don't be surprised to see red and purple ones act as well.

While most voting rights issues remain sharply polarized on partisan lines, that's not necessarily true for this cause — which has brought together such unlikely bedfellows as the Cato Institute, the ACLU, the American Probation and Parole Association and a consortium of evangelical groups. With bills pending in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas, a few "red state" improvements seem likely.

So by the time voters cast their ballots in 2022, we could be a whole lot closer to the reality of universal suffrage we often take for granted.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less