This morning an article came out on Vox.com about ways the upcoming Presidential Election may shape the legal landscape through creating a more liberal Supreme Court.

Currently, President Obama’s nominee of Merrick Garland is on hold, because Republicans are refusing to confirm his nominee at the tail end of his presidency, certainly holding out their decision in the hopes that a Republican president will come in and appoint someone more conservative.

However, if Hillary Clinton wins, she might just nominate someone even more liberal. With Kennedy and Ginsburg in their eighties and Breyer at 78, this next president has the power to redirect this country.

Among the ways in which the article highlighted change may come dealt with the current state of sex offender laws. It wrote:

One way in which the courts could be more receptive to directly challenging sentences, she says, is by starting to take “collateral consequences” into account. That’s the technical term for the myriad ways that criminal convictions, and in particular sex crime convictions, can hamper defendants’ lives in the long term. That includes restrictions on where they can live after they’re released from prison, bans on government employment and benefits like public housing, inclusion on sex offender registries, bans on gun purchases and voting, and so forth.

Dolovich outlined one possible example of a challenge incorporating collateral consequences: “So you’re a 19-year-old boy who’s been convicted of having sex with your 15-year-old girlfriend. You’re convicted of statutory rape, which itself carries huge direct carceral consequences — you go to prison for five years. But not only that; you also have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life, which is a burden in itself and carries innumerable other collateral consequences that come along with the status of being a registered sex offender.”

“So you bring a claim under Harmelin v. Michigan” — a 1991 ruling banning “grossly disproportionate” sentences — “claiming the sentence you received is grossly disproportionate to the crime. That’s an incredibly state-friendly standard, and you barely ever win. … But a court committed to including collateral consequences in its thinking about gross disproportionality would realize it’s not just the five years in prison, it’s all of the burdens that someone registered as a sex offender has to follow.”

Aside from being hopeful about the possibility of change, another of the take-aways from this article as it relates to the State of Florida are voting rights. Here, felons do not get their voting rights restored and in the case of most registered citizens have to wait almost a decade before applying to get their voting rights back.

 

Share This

Let's Spread Truth

Share this post!