The Minnesota Senate successfully passed a bill in February. The goal of the bill is to lift the voting restrictions on felons. It is common knowledge that some states do not allow felons to vote, particularly if they are still on parole.
However, a conservative group recently challenged the bill’s legitimacy in court. Unfortunately, the County judge, Thomas Lehmann, hearing the lawsuit, has ruled that the case is baseless.
The “Restore the Vote” bill allows felons who are out of prison to exercise their civic duty during elections. This bill stands even when the individual in question has yet to complete their parole.
Remember, the Minnesota Senate approved the bill in February. However, the state Supreme Court passed a ruling earlier that week that gave the bill a legal footing.
According to the state Supreme Court ruling, existing restrictions on felons stand as far as their voting rights are concerned. However, the state higher court clarifies that the Legislature can change or leave those restrictions as they are.
The Restore the Vote bill was a success thanks to the efforts of democrat members of the Minnesota Senate. Their goal was to politically empower about 55,000 Minnesota residents who are ex-convicts, the majority of whom are Blacks.
So far, about 21 states have passed a similar bill allowing felons to vote. Unfortunately, the bill is still facing conservative opposition in some states. Three of the 21 states that have lifted the restriction are GOP states.
Interestingly, convicts in Vermont, Marine, and the District of Columbia who are still serving time in prison can now vote. The state of California is working on passing a similar bill.
POLL — Should Donald J. Trump Be Allowed to Run for Office?
So, it was not surprising that Judge Lehmann casually dismissed the lawsuit by the Minnesota Voters Alliance. In his judgment, Lehmann clarified that the Alliance has no legal justification to sue the Legislature. Likewise, he mentioned that the Alliance did not provide proof of how the Legislature defied the constitution by approving the Restore the Vote bill in February.
To make their case, the Alliance’s legal team cited a portion of the state constitution. That portion states ex-convicts will be ineligible to vote “unless restored to civil rights.” While explaining this clause, the Alliance argued that felons need a restoration of “all their civil rights” before they can be allowed to vote.
ALSO READ: New Huntington Council Transforms City to Rights Battleground
In a similar case from some months ago, the Minnesota Court of Appeals dismissed another attempt to void the Legislature’s bill. Matthew Quinn of Mic Lacs County District ruled in October that the law allowing felons to vote was unconstitutional. Quinn is a conservative judge and was told off by the state attorney general for declaring such a controversial ruling.
To cap the Quinn case, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has dismissed his ruling on felons’ right to vote in the state. The higher court clarified that passing judgment on such cases is not within the purvey of a lower court judge.
You Might Also Like This:
“Absolute Embarrassment!” Critics Lambast Liberal DC Mayor for Her Ignorance
Lawyers for Atlanta Ask Federal Appeals Court to Kill ‘Stop Cop City’ Petition
California Gov. Gavin Newsom Defends San Francisco’s Homeless Woes in Late-Night Interview
Social Media Users Hail Laura Ingraham for Accusing Democrats of “Slow Death of Urban America”
