Nebraska's top election official, Secretary of State Bob Evnen, faced a setback as the state Supreme Court ruled against his authority to declare a state law unconstitutional. The law in question aimed to restore the voting rights of individuals who have been convicted of a felony and completed their sentences.
In July, Evnen ordered county election officials to reject voter registrations of those with felony convictions based on an opinion from Attorney General Mike Hilgers. The opinion deemed the law unconstitutional, leading to potential disenfranchisement of over 7,000 Nebraska residents, particularly impacting the Omaha-centered 2nd Congressional District.
The district, known for its electoral significance in a state that splits its electoral votes, has historically played a crucial role in presidential elections. With the upcoming election showing a tight race, the district's single electoral vote could sway the outcome.
The ruling also highlighted the rarity of pardons in Nebraska, with the Board of Pardons, comprising Evnen, Hilgers, and Governor Jim Pillen, being responsible for restoring voting rights through pardons.
The ACLU, representing advocacy group Civic Nebraska and two affected residents, challenged Evnen's directive, leading to a direct lawsuit to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
The issue of restoring voting rights for former felons has gained national attention, with various states adopting different approaches. While some states allow voting rights restoration post-sentence completion, others impose restrictions, contributing to felony disenfranchisement affecting millions across the country.
Experts note that felony disenfranchisement laws, rooted in the Jim Crow era, disproportionately impact Black individuals. The recent legal developments underscore the ongoing debate surrounding voting rights and criminal justice reform in the United States.
