Restriction of personal freedom and restriction of citizen rights are two different forms of punishments, ideally useful in different circumstances. But I guess thiie US applies them jointly?
The US loves to disenfranchise prisoners and felons, because the US has carefully throughout its history jiggered the system so that black people are significantly more likely to wind up as prisoners and felons. Felon disenfranchisement became suspiciously popular among US states immediately following the Civil War. No points for guessing why.
The situation has improved somewhat recently, with many states (although most of them not in the deep south…) relaxing laws and allowing previously convicted people to have their voting rights restored either automatically or via some process. To my knowledge, however, only two states allow incarcerated people to vote: Maine and Vermont.
In many countries they do vote!
Restriction of personal freedom and restriction of citizen rights are two different forms of punishments, ideally useful in different circumstances. But I guess thiie US applies them jointly?
The US loves to disenfranchise prisoners and felons, because the US has carefully throughout its history jiggered the system so that black people are significantly more likely to wind up as prisoners and felons. Felon disenfranchisement became suspiciously popular among US states immediately following the Civil War. No points for guessing why.
The situation has improved somewhat recently, with many states (although most of them not in the deep south…) relaxing laws and allowing previously convicted people to have their voting rights restored either automatically or via some process. To my knowledge, however, only two states allow incarcerated people to vote: Maine and Vermont.
In Texas, incarcerated people can technically vote by mail. But they have to apply (and can’t be felons)