Felony Disenfranchisement - Felony Conviction Thresholds Affected By Inflation

Felony Conviction Thresholds Affected By Inflation

One aspect of this issue is the fact that various property crimes can have absolute dollar amount thresholds that, if exceeded, turn a misdemeanor into a felony. For example, in Massachusetts under penalties specified in MGL Chap. 266: Sec. 127, a prosecution for malicious destruction of property can result in a felony conviction if the dollar amount of damage exceeds $250. Some people would argue that $250 is excessively low and that since this dollar amount has not risen for many years, even damaging another's radio or cell phone could result in losing one's right to vote. If the dollar thresholds are not increased by law (or indexed to inflation), a conviction for what is effectively very little money could result in losing one's right to vote.

In losing one's right to vote from being a felon, Massachusetts joined 47 other states that bar prison inmates from voting. Only two states, Maine and Vermont, permit inmates to vote while serving felony prison terms. Three inmates, an African-American, an Hispanic-American, and a Caucasian-American, filed a lawsuit claiming that the action violated the Voting Rights Act. They also claimed that the measure amounted to illegal extra punishment in violation of the U.S.Constitution prohibition on ex post facto laws. A federal judge threw out the ex post facto claim but ruled that the voting rights challenge should proceed to trial. A three-judge panel of the first U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston disagreed and threw out the entire lawsuit. In their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the inmates argued that federal appeals courts are split on the issue of whether the Voting Rights Act supports lawsuits challenging felon disenfranchisement measures.