Publius: The Journal of Federalism Advance Access originally published online on April 21, 2009
Publius: The Journal of Federalism 2009 39(3):527-556; doi:10.1093/publius/pjp009
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appears in the following Publius: The Journal of Federalism issue: The State of American Federalism 2008–2009 [View the issue table of contents]
Criminal Disenfranchisement and the Challenge of American Federalism
University of Vermont; alec.ewald{at}uvm.edu
This article reviews recent developments in American felony disenfranchisement law. Examining several variables’ impact on states’ likelihood of enacting reform, I find that only initial policy severity proves a strong predictor of restriction-relaxing change, as most of the dozen states enacting such reforms in the last decade began the period with extremely restrictive policies. Entrepreneurship by African American and Democratic lawmakers has been important, but many Republicans conclude that debating disenfranchisement can be advantageous to them, as well. The Help America Vote Act has centralized administration of this policy, while local officials retain important roles. The article concludes by examining two unresolved problems: whether ineligibility follows a person moving from one state to another, and whether Congress has the constitutional authority to enfranchise former offenders.