RT Article
T1 Barriers to the ballot: implications for the development of state and national crime policies
JF Criminal justice studies
VO 30
IS 3
SP 276
OP 288
A1 Carr, Collin M.
A1 Rank, Allison
A1 Schildkraut, Jaclyn
A2 Rank, Allison
A2 Schildkraut, Jaclyn
LA English
YR 2017
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1728601460
AB In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, which included the preclearance formula for determining which state and local jurisdictions needed to obtain federal approval before changing their election laws and voting procedures, was unconstitutional. By requiring federal approval, this provision prevented historically repressive jurisdictions from enacting covert policies to hinder non-whites from voting. The ruling in Shelby County is problematic because methods in use across the country prevent non-white citizens from casting their ballots, leaving their interests unaddressed. As people of color hold different attitudes and views than whites towards specific criminal justice measures, contemporary barriers to the ballot have potential implications for criminal law and policy. Consequently, analyses of two contemporary methods of denying non-whites a voice in government are warranted: felon disenfranchisement and voter identification laws. After considering the disproportionate effects of these laws on non-white voting, the paper reveals the potential harm that may result from Shelby County if similar laws spread to jurisdictions no longer covered by the Voting Rights Act.
K1 Felon disenfranchisement
K1 Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
K1 United States Supreme Court
K1 Voting Rights Act of 1965
K1 Criminal Justice System
K1 Voter ID laws
DO 10.1080/1478601X.2017.1318343