The Nebraska Supreme Court ordered the secretary of state on Wednesday to allow people with felony convictions to vote after finishing their sentences, resolving confusion about who can participate in this year’s election and rejecting an argument by the state attorney general that lawmakers overstepped in extending voting rights to those with convictions.
The ruling will help shape the state’s electorate, which can carry special importance in presidential races because of the way Nebraska splits its Electoral College votes by congressional district rather than using the winner-takes-all approach of most states. Nebraska also has a competitive U.S. Senate race this year, as well as a tightly contested U.S. House race in the Omaha area.
Nebraska, which usually votes Republican in statewide races, was part of a national trend in loosening voting rules for people with criminal records. In 2005, lawmakers in the state abolished a lifetime voting ban for people convicted of felonies, but continued to require people to wait two years to vote after finishing their sentences. This year, in a bipartisan vote, lawmakers got rid of that waiting period, clearing the way for people to cast ballots immediately after finishing prison and parole terms.
Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican, allowed the bill to become law without his signature, but the measure attracted skepticism from Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Secretary of State Bob Evnen, both Republicans.
Just before the new measure was set to take effect this summer, Mr. Hilgers released a written opinion saying that both the new law and the 2005 law were improper. He argued that under the Nebraska Constitution, only the state’s Board of Pardons could restore voting rights to someone with a felony conviction. Mr. Evnen then instructed county election officials to stop registering voters with felony convictions. The Board of Pardons is made up of Mr. Pillen, Mr. Hilgers and Mr. Evnen.
Reached on Wednesday morning, Cindi Allen, a deputy secretary of state, said Mr. Evnen’s office planned to comment on the ruling on Wednesday afternoon. A spokeswoman for Mr. Hilgers said his office was reviewing the ruling and planned to comment later on Wednesday.
Supporters of the law expanding voting rights sued over the implementation of Mr. Hilgers’s opinion on behalf of two people who said they were hoping to vote this year. (A third man was involved initially but withdrew from the suit.) They argued that the Legislature had been within its rights to expand voting rights and criticized Mr. Hilgers and Mr. Evnen for injecting confusion and uncertainty into the registration process just before an election. One group, Civic Nebraska, said that after the attorney general’s opinion was published, it had to cancel voter registration events for people who had finished criminal sentences.
During oral arguments in late August, a justice asked Nebraska’s solicitor general whether the fact that many people with felony convictions had already been allowed to vote for nearly two decades should affect their decision. The solicitor general, Eric Hamilton, said it should have no bearing.
“The last 19 years are contrasted against 130 years of unbroken practice in this state of re-enfranchisement through executive clemency,” Mr. Hamilton said.
Jane Seu, a lawyer for the A.C.L.U. of Nebraska, asked the justices to “correct this overreach” and “give Nebraska voters the clarity they need before this year’s election.”
The debate in Nebraska played out at a time when Republican officials in several states are seeking to to tighten voter registration rules or reconsidering when people with felony convictions should be eligible to cast ballots.
This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed Arizona to require that people using a state form to register to vote show proof of citizenship. In Virginia last year, Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, said he had rescinded a policy that automatically restored voting rights to residents who had completed felony sentences. And former President Donald J. Trump’s campaign criticized Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, the Democratic nominee for vice president, for signing a law that allows people with felony convictions to vote after they complete their prison sentences. (Mr. Trump was convicted of felonies in New York this year.)
In presidential elections in Nebraska, two electoral votes are awarded to the statewide winner and one vote is awarded to the winner in each of the three congressional districts. Two of the districts, and the state as a whole, are firmly Republican. But the Second District, in and around Omaha, is a swing district that supported President Biden in 2020 and Mr. Trump in 2016.
That district could help determine partisan control of the U.S. House of Representatives. The incumbent Republican, Don Bacon, a relatively moderate retired Air Force general, is facing a challenge from State Senator Tony Vargas, a Democrat who has attracted funding from national groups.
Polls in the state have also shown a competitive U.S. Senate race between Senator Deb Fischer, the Republican incumbent, and Dan Osborn, a political independent.
The post Nebraska Supreme Court Upholds Voting Rights for Felons appeared first on New York Times.
