In Wake of Federal Updates, Maryland Becomes First State to Issue Profiling Guidance

Surrounded by a national conversation about police brutality and law enforcement’s treatment of minorities, Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh on August 25 issued guidance designed to ban discriminatory profiling by law enforcement on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability or gender identity.

“Police do a dangerous, difficult job, and they do it well. But experience shows us that improper profiling by police does terrible damage,” Frosh said. “The memorandum we are issuing today is meant to put an end to profiling of all kinds, which will help repair the frayed relationships between police and many in the community by making mutual respect the norm in everyday police encounters.”

Maryland is now the first state to issue guidance since the U.S. Department of Justice issued its own updated profiling guidance in December 2014. Like Maryland’s, the federal guidance expanded the ban on profiling to include additional identity categories beyond just race and ethnicity – an expansion that Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference, said would “make law enforcement both more effective and reflective of our national commitment to fairness and diversity.”

That federal guidance, however, maintained troubling exceptions and loopholes, such as not applying to state and local law enforcement. That’s why – though it doesn’t create enforceable rights – it’s up to states to issue their own version of the federal guidelines.

The Leadership Conference and 80 other national, state, and local organizations in February 2015 sent a letter to President Obama expressing their concerns with the administration’s guidance, including the exception for state and local law enforcement.

“State and local law enforcement agencies like the NYPD, the Ferguson Police Department, and the Cleveland Police Department have encounters with community members every day that raise serious concerns about discriminatory policing,” the letter stated.

In April 2015, Sen. Ben Cardin, D. Md., and Rep. John Conyers, D. Mich., reintroduced the End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA), which would prohibit profiling by federal, state, local, and Indian tribal law enforcement on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation – the same categories as the DOJ’s federal guidance. That legislation, which is stalled in both chambers of Congress, would apply to state and local agencies exempted by federal guidelines.

In Wake of Federal Updates, Maryland Becomes First State to Issue Profiling Guidance - See more at: http://www.civilrights.org/archives/2015/1535-maryland-profiling-guidance.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/#sthash.2ulTumcV.dpuf

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Rep. Conyers & Sen. Cardin Reintroduce Legislation To Restore Ex-Offenders’ Voting Rights

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) reintroduced H.R. 1459, the “Democracy Restoration Act of 2015.”  Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) yesterday introduced its Senate companion, S. 772.  The bill would create uniform federal standards for returning the voting rights of ex-offenders to vote in federal elections.  The legislation could result in returning the right to vote for millions of Americans with a prior conviction who served their time and paid their debt to society. 

The Democracy Restoration Act is a narrowly crafted effort to expand voting rights for people with felony convictions, while protecting state prerogatives to generally establish voting qualifications.  The legislation would only apply to persons who are not in prison, and would only apply to federal elections.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“The denial of voting rights by many states to ex-offenders represents a vestige from a time when suffrage was denied to whole classes of our population based on race, gender, religion, national origin and property.  This goes against the very fundamental principles of our Democracy,” said Rep. John Conyers.  “Just as poll taxes and literacy tests prevented an entire class of citizens, namely African Americans, from integrating into society after centuries of slavery, ex-offender disenfranchisement laws prevent people from reintegrating into society after they have paid their debt by serving time in prison.  Disenfranchisement laws isolate and alienate ex-offenders, and serve as one more obstacle in their attempt to successfully reintegrate into society.”

According to The Sentencing Project, since 1997, 23 states have amended felony disenfranchisement policies in an effort to reduce their restrictiveness and expand voter eligibility.  These reforms have resulted in an estimated 800,000 citizens regaining their voting rights.  Despite these reforms, over 5.8 million citizens continue to be ineligible to vote in Federal elections.  More than 4 million of the disqualified voters are not in prison, but are on probation, parole, or have completed their sentence.  Nearly 3 million of the disenfranchised have completed their entire sentence, including probation and parole. 

“The United States is one of the few Western democracies that allows the permanent denial of voting rights for individuals with felony convictions.  State disenfranchisement laws deny citizens participation in our democracy and the patchwork of laws leads to an unfair disparity and unequal participation in Federal elections based solely on where an individual lives, in addition to the racial disparities inherent in our judicial system,” said Senator Cardin.  “Congress has a responsibility to remedy these problems and enact a nationwide standard for the restoration of voting rights.”

The current patchwork of state laws creates widespread confusion among election officials throughout the country.  For example, in Ohio, an erroneous interpretation of state law deprived thousands of people with felony convictions of the opportunity to register.  Only federal law can conclusively resolve the ambiguities in this area plaguing our voting system.

H.R. 1459 was introduced with the support of the following original cosponsors: Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Cicilline (D-RI), Rep. Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX), Rep. Nadler (D-NY), Rep. Cohen (D-TN), Rep. Cummings (D-MD), Rep. Hastings (D-FL), Rep. Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Grijalva (D-AZ), Rep. Gutierrez (D-IL), Rep. Kaptur (D-OH), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Moore (D-WI), Rep. Serrano (D-NY), Rep. Wilson (D-FL), Rep. McGovern (D-MA), Rep. Sewell (D-AL), Rep. Chu (D-CA), Rep. Richmond (D-LA), Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) and Rep. Honda (D-CA).

Democracy Restoration Act of 2015

Section-By-Section of HR 1459 the Democracy Restoration Act

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©