The Nebraska Supreme Court recently ruled that a top election official did not have the authority to declare a state law unconstitutional that restored voting rights to those convicted of felonies. This decision has implications for the upcoming election, as it could affect thousands of residents who may be denied the right to vote. Secretary of State Bob Evnen had ordered county election officials to reject voter registrations of those with felony convictions, citing an opinion by Attorney General Mike Hilgers. This move could have prevented many people from voting, especially in the Omaha-centered 2nd Congressional District, which has historically split its electoral votes and could be crucial in determining the outcome of the presidential race.
The 2nd Congressional District in Nebraska has awarded an electoral vote to Democratic presidential candidates twice in the past, making it a key battleground area in elections. With the upcoming presidential race being highly competitive, securing even a single electoral vote could make a significant difference. Both Democratic and Republican groups have been actively campaigning in the district, with the potential to swing the outcome of the election. Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and Democratic groups have invested heavily in the district in the hopes of winning the electoral vote.
The last day to register to vote for the 2024 general election in Nebraska is Oct. 25, and it must be done in person at a voter’s county election commission office. Election Day is scheduled for Nov. 5. The opinion by Attorney General Hilgers stated that only the state Board of Pardons, controlled by the executive branch, has the authority to restore voting rights through pardons. However, pardons are rare in Nebraska, and the opinion also found unconstitutional a 2005 state law that restored voting rights for felons two years after completing their sentences.
The ACLU is representing advocacy group Civic Nebraska and two Nebraska residents who would be denied the right to vote under Evnen’s directive. The issue of restoring voting rights for former felons has gained national attention in recent years, with different states handling it differently. In Florida, there were efforts to weaken a voter-approved amendment to restore voting rights for felons, while in Tennessee, a bipartisan bill was killed that would have allowed residents with felony convictions to apply to vote without restoring their gun rights. Despite a trend towards restoring rights, around 5.85 million people across the country are still disenfranchised due to felony disenfranchisement laws, which date back to the Jim Crow era and disproportionately affect Black individuals.
Felony disenfranchisement laws have a long history of targeting Black people, and they remain a significant barrier to voting for many individuals. Despite efforts to restore rights in certain states, millions of people are still unable to vote due to these laws. The issue of restoring voting rights for former felons is complex, with varying approaches and outcomes in different states. The decision by the Nebraska Supreme Court regarding the restoration of voting rights for felons will have a significant impact on the upcoming election and could influence the outcomes in key battleground areas like the 2nd Congressional District.
