Felony Disenfranchisement in Louisiana
October 17, 2024
By, Henry Blackburn
As the issue of felony disenfranchisement gains traction in legal circles and the greater public sphere, an important topic for study is Louisiana’s own felony disenfranchisement laws. Louisiana’s Election Code forbids any person who is convicted of a felony from registering to vote if they have been imprisoned within the past five years. However, contrary to other states in the South, Louisiana allows for certain “classes” of convicted felons to regain the right to vote.
For example, Louisiana’s legislature previously voted to lessen restrictions on voter enfranchisement for convicted felons. In 2019, Act 636 went into effect and restored the right to vote to around 36,000 felons who stayed out of prison for five or more years. Further, the law also included felons who had never been imprisoned but were on probation.
To regain the right to vote, felons were required to show documentation from correction officials that they had indeed stayed out of prison for five years. However, in 2023, the groups the Campaign Legal Center, League of Women Voters, and Voice of the Experience filed a lawsuit (VOTE v. Ardoin) against the state, arguing that the documentation required was nearly impossible for individuals to reasonably obtain. The groups claimed that Black and Brown voters in the state were disproportionately affected by the documentation requirement, and that such “arbitrary” rules imposed by the Act should be invalidated.
The complaint argued that Act 127, a state law passed in 2021, allowed individuals who had a felony conviction but had not been imprisoned to register the vote without the documentation required by Act 636. It claimed, however, that Act 127 ultimately created two classes of citizens with felony convictions — those who did not need to provide documentation because they had never been imprisoned, and those who did have to provide documentation that they had not been imprisoned in the past five years.
The case is still ongoing and has survived several motions for dismissal.
It is also likely that we cannot predict the outcome to the case. The plaintiffs rely on an Equal Protection Clause claim in their complaint and argue that the National Voting Rights Act preempts the requirement to provide additional documentation. The Supreme Court has upheld this argument in the past in Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. However, the case will likely be appealed — no matter the result — to the Fifth Circuit, which this year upheld Mississippi’s lifetime ban leveled against convicted felons. While the lifetime ban did not concern additional steps to register to vote, it still signals the Court’s probably opposition to the plaintiff’s arguments. It is unlikely that this case will be resolved in Federal District Court before the upcoming 2024 U.S. election, and, on appeal, the Fifth Circuit could order an injunction against registering formerly convicted felons to vote. Even further, the Supreme Court, if it were to grant certiorari, could rule in favor of the state and invalidate the precedent settled in Arizona.
As it stands in Louisiana, and as the 2024 election nears, convicted felons who have served prison time within the past five years still exist in this state of legal limbo. And, if the plaintiffs’ arguments are correct, it seems to be the case that a separate “class” of convicted felons can automatically have their rights restored. Louisiana’s felony disenfranchisement law, though more forgiving than those of other states, will continue to raise Constitutional questions in the lead-up to, and after, another momentous election for the country.