Minnesota Supreme Court rules current law barring some felons from voting is constitutional
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled current state law barring felons from voting until after their sentence is complete is constitutional, delivering a long-awaited opinion that impacts thousands of Minnesotans' access to the polls.
The decision in the Schroeder v. Simon case, released more than a year after oral arguments, upheld a lower court ruling and determined that "plaintiffs have not offered sufficient evidence to prove that [the law regarding felon voting rights] violates the equal protection principle contained in the Minnesota Constitution."
Plaintiffs argued the current law prohibiting voting for people with felony convictions until their sentence is complete -- including probation, parole and supervised released -- is unconstitutional.
The decision comes as the DFL-led legislature considers restoring the vote to people once they leave prison.
One of those who sued, Jennifer Schroeder, spent just one year in jail for drug possession with a 40-year probation period, keeping her from voting until she is 71.
During a news conference on Wednesday following the decision, she said she was angered by the court's ruling.
"The court decided that I am not worthy to be a full citizen of this and a full member of the society because of a past drug possession charge," Schroeder told reporters. "By ruling against our case, the Minnesota Supreme Court has said that what I am doing and who I am is not enough."
Justice Paul Thissen, writing for the majority, said that while current law passes constitutional muster, the court acknowledges the "troubling consequences" of current state law, including the "disparate racial impacts, flowing from the disenfranchisement of persons convicted of a felony."
Still, the court deferred to the state legislature.
"The Legislature retains the power to respond to those consequences," the opinion reads. "The Minnesota Constitution empowers the Legislature to address the public policy concerns raised by appellants in this case."
Advocates for felon voting rights were disappointed the court didn't rule in their favor, but stressed they believe it's incumbent on state lawmakers to pass a bill making the changes.
"Our clients now have no recourse to the courts and is therefore past time for the legislature to act," Craig Coleman, attorney at Faegre Drinker who represented the plaintiffs.
The Minnesota House of Representatives earlier this month approved a bill allowing people to vote once they no longer are behind bars, even if they have time left on their sentence. A similar proposal is moving through the DFL-led Senate, which could take it up as early as next week. Leaders in that chamber on Wednesday doubled down their commitment to getting it passed.
More than 50,000 Minnesotans are disenfranchised because of the voting rights rules for people with felony convictions, according to an estimate from the ACLU of Minnesota.
Justice Natalie Hudson, who was the sole justice to dissent, wrote that the court "eschewed its responsibility" to serve as the "the final guarantor of equality and fairness." She said it's incumbent on the legislature to act on this matter.
"I regret that the court limits the ability of the Minnesota Constitution's equal protection principle to address this injustice," she wrote. "The right to vote is too central to our democracy, and the constraints on that right are too perilous, for us to ignore."
Craig said he and the plaintiffs would've still pushed for legislation, even if they prevailed in court.
Current law was first enacted in 1963. In 21 states, people lose their rights while incarcerated but they're automatically restored upon release, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
During the House floor debate, Republicans offered several amendments to the legislation to create carve-outs for certain felonies -- including murder and sex crimes -- for which a person would need to complete their whole sentence.
Those suggestions were rejected by Democrats.
Fifteen other states have laws mirroring Minnesota's current statute. In a few states, a person never loses their right to vote.