Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In a report submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 2013, a coalition of non-profit civil rights and criminal justice organizations argued that US felony disenfranchisement laws are in violation of Articles 25 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by the United States in 1992. [29]
Felon jury exclusion is less visible than felony disenfranchisement, and few socio-legal scholars have challenged the statutes that withhold a convicted felon's opportunity to sit on a jury. [18] While constitutional challenges to felon jury exclusion almost always originate from interested litigants, some scholars contend that "it is the ...
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that convicted felons could be barred from voting beyond their sentence and parole without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
In Florida, felons lose civil rights, including the ability to hold public office and serve on a jury. ... Federal law bars individuals convicted of a felony from possessing a firearm, and most ...
In addition to losing the right to vote, Florida law deprives convicted felons of certain Civil Rights including the right to serve on a jury, hold public office, and restricts the issuance and ...
The first former US president convicted of a felony, ... Florida will defer to that state’s laws for how a felon can regain his or her voting rights. ... A successful 2018 ballot initiative ...
Employment discrimination against persons with criminal records in the United States has been illegal since enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [citation needed] Employers retain the right to lawfully consider an applicant's or employee's criminal conviction(s) for employment purposes e.g., hiring, retention, promotion, benefits, and delegated duties.
Haynes argued that, because he was a convicted felon and thus prohibited from owning a firearm, requiring him to register any firearms in his possession was requiring him to make an open admission to the government that he was in violation of the law, which was essentially a violation of his right not to incriminate himself.