Supreme Court turns away Virginia's appeal in felon voting ban lawsuit
The Supreme Court turned away Virginia's appeal on Monday that sought to quash a challenge to the state's lifetime felon voting ban, allowing the lawsuit to move ahead toward trial.
Two disenfranchised voters claim the ban violates the Virginia Readmission Act, a federal law that set conditions for Virginia to regain congressional representation following the Civil War.
Lower courts allowed the suit to move forward, saying courts can enforce the Readmission Act and the state doesn't have 11th Amendment immunity. But Virginia's Republican-controlled attorney general's office argued to the justices that would open the 'floodgates' and mark a 'radical change in the law.'
'The Fourth Circuit's ruling that the Readmission Acts are judicially enforceable invites courts to wade into the political decisions that restored the rebel States to federal representation more than 150 years ago, calling into question Congress's continuing determination that the States have republican governments and are entitled to representation,' the state wrote in its petition.
In a brief order, the Supreme Court declined to take up the case. A federal district judge is set to hold a bench trial in October in the case.
It was filed in 2023 by two convicted felons who are ineligible to vote under the Virginia Constitution's lifetime voting ban for felons.
Tati Abu King was originally convicted of robbery in 1988 before the governor restored her voting rights. She later lost them again after being convicted of felony drug possession.
Toni Heath Johnson has various felony convictions dating back to the 1980s, including forgery, credit card theft and bigamy. Her voting rights, too, were restored, but she was subsequently convicted of drug possession and child endangerment.
Their suit points to the Virginia Readmission Act, which was signed in 1870 following the Civil War and allowed the state to regain congressional representation. But it was conditioned on the state never changing its constitution to disenfranchise voters except for those convicted of 'such crimes as are now felonies at common law.'
The two Virginians, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and law firm Wilmer Hale, argue that exception only covers a handful of long-recognized felonies like murder, arson and rape.
But they say their convictions weren't recognized at common law in 1870, so they should be able to vote. They urged the Supreme Court to turn away Virginia's appeal so the case can move forward. 'The Act's purpose was to prevent Virginia from manipulating statutory criminal law to disenfranchise Black voters—specifically, from convicting and disenfranchising newly freed Black residents based on statutory crimes that were not felonies at the time Virginia entered the Union,' their attorneys wrote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
23 minutes ago
- Politico
Oz nudges Senate Republicans to ease off on Medicaid cuts
House Republicans are aiming to slash funding for the nonpartisan watchdog for waste, fraud and abuse within the federal government by nearly half in the next fiscal year, according to spending bill text released Sunday night. The House Appropriations subcommittee funding Congress and its support agencies, led by chairman David Valadao (R-Calif.), is set to mark up their fiscal 2026 measure Monday evening, with the full committee set to act Thursday. The Legislative Branch bill would provide $6.7 billion — $51 million below the current funding level, which was set in fiscal 2024. Per tradition, the House bill does not touch any Senate funding. 'Chairman Valadao's bill puts the American people first — in strengthening the institutions that represent them, protecting effective governance, and safeguarding taxpayer dollars,' said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) in a statement. The deepest cuts in the bill are to the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress that would see a $396.5 million reduction from current levels to $415.4 million. GAO has served as the nation's chief investigator of wrongdoing at federal agencies for more than a century, but has been fighting for months as Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration have attempted to undercut its legal conclusions and independence. Now, they are attempting to shrink the agency into submission as it pursues nearly 40 investigations into whether the White House is illegally withholding, or 'impounding,' money Congress had previously approved. Also tucked into the bill is a major policy change that would eliminate the GAO's ability to bring civil action against the executive branch over impoundments of funds. 'GAO's work makes it possible for the legislative branch to hold government accountable,' said Daniel Schuman, executive director of the American Governance Institute. 'Congress needs independent expert advice, which is exactly what GAO provides.' Also on the chopping block is the Library of Congress, which is another legislative branch agency also engaged in a power struggle against intrusion by the Trump administration. The bill allocates $767.6 million for the Library of Congress, which is $84.5 million below the current funding level and $133.7 million below the FY26 request. 'This bill does nothing to safeguard against the growing levels of executive overreach into legislative branch agencies,' said Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the legislative branch subcommittee. Some other key provisions in the GOP-written bill include: Capitol Police: The Capitol Police would see a $84.4 million boost to their funding under the bill, bringing the total to $891 million. Some lawmakers had asked for an increase in office funding for use for security, but the bill flat-funds the Members Representational Allowance, which can be used for some member security purposes. Member Pay: The bill would continue the member pay freeze that has been in effect since 2013, halting automatic cost of living increases that members of Congress are supposed to get under law. Gay marriage: The bill includes language that prohibits discrimination against any person who 'speaks, or acts' in accordance with a 'sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman.'
Newsweek
33 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Senate Bill Would Protect Thousands of Migrants From Deportation
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senate Democrats introduced new legislation to protect hundreds of thousands of immigrants who have had their legal status revoked by the Trump administration. The so-called Safe Environment from Countries Under Repression and Emergency (SECURE) Act would offer "long-term stability" for those under Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) programs, if it is able to pass in a Republican-controlled Congress. Why It Matters The Trump administration has argued that TPS was abused by the Biden administration, allowing thousands of immigrants from countries including Venezuela, Afghanistan and Haiti to remain in the U.S. for longer than necessary. The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed the White House to end some of these protections. The U.S. Capitol Building at dusk on June 21, 2025, in Washington. The U.S. Capitol Building at dusk on June 21, 2025, in To Know Democratic Senators Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump, and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada were among the 30 lawmakers backing the legislation that would open the pathway to permanent residency for those who received TPS. According to a press release from the group, TPS and DED holders in the U.S. for five years or longer would be eligible to apply for a green card, along with their spouse, domestic partner and children, as long as they met certain requirements. The bill would also make TPS applicants eligible for work and allow them to apply for travel outside the U.S. while their application is pending. TPS is usually granted for a period of 18 months, and it is up to the Secretary of Homeland Security to discontinue protections or extend them, which has been done for a number of countries for several years, including during the first Trump administration. Current Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has moved to end protections for those from Venezuela, Haiti, Cameroon, Afghanistan and Nepal since January. Under the Democrat-backed bill, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would be required to notify Congress and justify why status was being revoked. Currently, about a half-million immigrants who were allowed to legally remain in the U.S. on TPS face the chance of deportation, some to countries still experiencing conditions that led to protections being introduced in the first place. Noem has argued that those situations have eased and that it is time for immigrants to return to their home countries. What People Are Saying Senator Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, in a press release: "America has long used the TPS and DED programs to offer special legal protections to individuals in the United States whose lives would be put at extreme risk if forced to return to their countries of origin. As they've sought safety and stability here, TPS and DED recipients have built new lives in America, living here legally for years—sometimes decades—and making important contributions to our communities. "But the Trump Administration is threatening both the lives they have built and the safety of these individuals—forcing TPS recipients to return to dangerous places like Haiti, Venezuela, Afghanistan, and more. This bill offers much-needed certainty to TPS and DED recipients – providing a path to stay safely in the U.S. and continue to call America their home." Liz Shuler, AFL-CIO president, in a press release: "Immigrant workers are under unprecedented attack: hundreds of thousands of people have been stripped of their legal status and work authorization, throwing families and industries into chaos and uncertainty. "Workers with Temporary Protected Status, many of whom have lived and worked in our country for decades, are vital members of our communities and our unions. The SECURE Act is common-sense legislation that would provide TPS holders with stable, permanent lawful status so they can continue to raise their families, work, and contribute to our economy." What Happens Next While 30 senators back the bill, it is not clear whether it will pass the chamber or be backed in the House, which is also controlled by Republicans.
Politico
37 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump's team makes the case for cuts
WASHINGTON WATCH From Capitol Hill to CDC headquarters in Atlanta, this last week of June will yield important clues about the direction of health policy under President Donald Trump — and whether a GOP Congress will go along. On Wednesday, Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), who's spoken out against global health cuts, will question Russell Vought, director of the White House's Office of Management and Budget, who's spearheaded them. At stake: Trump's request to Congress that it rescind $900 million in funds lawmakers asked the administration to spend on global health this year, including $400 million for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief — which President George W. Bush created more than two decades ago to fight AIDS in lower income countries. Collins told POLITICO earlier this month she wouldn't support cutting PEPFAR, touting it as an initiative that's 'saved literally millions of lives and been extremely effective.' When Vought testified before House appropriators three weeks ago, he said the administration would continue to fund lifesaving treatment, but stood firm on scaling back prevention work. 'It is something that our budget will be very trim on,' Vought said of funding AIDS prevention work, 'because we believe that many of these nonprofits are not geared towards the viewpoints of the administration. And we're $37 trillion in debt. So at some point, the continent of Africa needs to absorb more of the burden of providing this health care.' Follow the money: On Tuesday, the health panel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee will be the latest congressional panel to hear the case for Trump's fiscal 2026 budget, which calls for a cut of more than a quarter in funding for the Department of Health and Human Services starting Oct. 1. Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will testify. In Atlanta: The first meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's vaccine advisory panel since Kennedy replaced all its members starts Wednesday. The eight Kennedy-appointed panelists will consider the use of the preservative thimerosal in vaccines. Kennedy wrote a book in 2014 calling for its ban, arguing it causes brain damage and probably autism. The CDC says that's not the case. WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care. A metastatic cancer patient's treatment and medical fate are in limbo after the National Institutes of Health cleaved its workforce, The Washington Post reports. Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Danny Nguyen at dnguyen@ Carmen Paun at cpaun@ Ruth Reader at rreader@ or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@ Want to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: Dannyn516.70, CarmenP.82, RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01. TECH MAZE At a meeting Friday, Europe's health ministers agreed to put their weight behind the regulation of social media to protect kids' mental health, our Claudia Chiappa reports from Luxembourg. The agreement calls on countries to consider 'strengthening accurate, reliable, robust and privacy-preserving age verification processes' and 'protecting children from addictive design practices.' Countries should also consider introducing screen-free zones and digital limits within schools, the ministers determined. Why it matters: The push to regulate social media is gaining steam on both sides of the Atlantic as evidence mounts that social media can negatively affect kids. In Washington, lawmakers continue to consider a variety of proposals, from restrictions on addictive design features to age-verification rules. States are already moving forward, with Utah earlier this year requiring age verification by app stores. And California, Connecticut and Maryland have passed laws aimed at regulating website design. What's next? The EU's executive body has launched a study on the impact of social media on kids and excessive screen time on mental health and well-being, which the health ministers hope will bolster the case for regulation.
