NCJ Number
211198
Journal
Criminal Justice Ethics Volume: 24 Issue: 1 Dated: Winter/Spring 2005 Pages: 3-18
Date Published
2005
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This article refutes both the standard liberal and republican arguments for the disenfranchisement of convicted felons.
Abstract
More than 4.7 million American citizens are deprived of the right to vote because they have been convicted of felonies. The main argument put forth in this article is that the disenfranchisement of felons who have completed their sentences is morally wrong and represents poor social policy. The argument generally presented by liberals for felony disenfranchisement is that felons have violated the social contract, thus forfeiting their political rights. This argument is based on social contract theory and the author shows how social contract theory does not indeed imply that felons should be disenfranchised. On the contrary, social contract theory, the author argues, underscores the importance of the right to vote and implies that it is wrong to deprive the right to vote to felons who have completed their sentences. Next, the republican argument for felony disenfranchisement is presented and critiqued. This argument holds that felons have demonstrated a lack of civic virtue, which is necessary for the proper exercise of the right to vote. However, the author illustrates how the claim of a lack of virtue among felons springs from an exaggerated notion that felons are vastly different from law-abiding citizens and that, moreover, a concern for civic virtue actually supports upholding the voting rights of all felons, even those who are still serving their sentences. Notes