5-4 Richardson v. Ramirez
4 snips
Nov 21, 2023 The podcast discusses the case of Richardson v. Ramirez which led to the disenfranchisement of formerly incarcerated individuals and the denial of their right to vote. It explores the 14th Amendment provision and Supreme Court ruling, and analyzes Thurgood Marshall's dissent arguing for voting rights. The podcast also delves into the unenforced provision of the 14th Amendment, voter suppression, collateral consequences of disenfranchisement, and the controversial application of the Equal Protection Clause.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Criminal Disenfranchisement Varied and Widespread
- Millions of Americans are disenfranchised due to criminal convictions, with laws varying wildly by state.
- Some states permanently bar voting rights while others restore them after sentences end, creating confusion and inequality.
Penalty Clause Used to Support Disenfranchisement
- The 14th Amendment's penalty clause punishes states that disenfranchise voters by reducing their congressional representation.
- The Supreme Court interpreted this to allow states to disenfranchise felons, reinforcing disenfranchisement rather than protecting voting rights.
Narrow Meaning of 'Other Crimes'
- The phrase "rebellion or other crimes" likely means only crimes similar to rebellion, not all crimes.
- Interpreting it broadly allows states to disenfranchise for any crime, which is a stretch of textual logic.