Hopkins v. Hosemann (now Watson)
Case Summary
LWVUS, LWV Mississippi, and eleven other civil rights organizations filed an amicus brief supporting plaintiffs who asserted Mississippi’s permanent felony disenfranchisement law violated the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. The amici argued the law, which permanently stripped voting rights from citizens convicted of a wide variety of crimes, disproportionately affected Black Mississippians and created a cycle of disenfranchisement and underrepresentation rooted in racism.
The League of Women Voters of the United States (LWVUS) and the League of Women Voters of Mississippi (LWV Mississippi) filed an amicus brief supporting plaintiffs arguing Mississippi's law disenfranchising citizens incarcerated for life with certain convictions was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution.
In 1890, after the overthrow of Reconstruction, Mississippi enacted a new constitution that systematically disenfranchised Black Mississippians from voting. Among the provisions designed to entrench white supremacy were provisions permanently disenfranchising citizens with certain felony convictions. As originally enacted, Section 241 of the Mississippi State Constitution permanently disenfranchised citizens convicted of a prescribed list of crimes that the framers considered more likely to be committed by Black Mississippians while excluding crimes that were more likely to be committed by white Mississippians.
For example, bribery, burglary, theft, arson, obtaining money or goods under false pretenses, perjury, forgery, embezzlement, and bigamy were included as crimes for which conviction led to permanent disenfranchisement, while rape and murder were not. This disparity was deliberate, intended to disproportionately disenfranchise Black men, as recognized by the Mississippi Supreme Court in 1896 in Ratliff v. Beale. Subsequent amendments in 1950 and 1968 removed burglary as a disenfranchising crime and added the crimes of murder and rape to the list of felony convictions that resulted in disenfranchisement. Mississippi's attorney general has also interpreted Section 241 to include additional disenfranchising crimes.
Those who are disenfranchised under Section 241 may regain their voting rights via (1) an executive order signed by the governor of Mississippi or (2) a bill enacted by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the Mississippi legislature, as detailed in Section 253 of the state Constitution. Between 2013 and when the lawsuit was filed in 2018, only 14 Mississippians with disenfranchising felony convictions regained voting rights via the state legislature passing a bill.
On March 27, 2018, 6 Mississippians with felony convictions represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the law firm Simpson Thacher filed a federal class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The lawsuit argued, among other claims, that Section 241’s felony disenfranchisement scheme was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
The district court subsequently granted summary judgment to the defendants on the Eighth Amendment claim.
The plaintiffs then appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. On Aug. 3, 2023, a three-judge panel ruled that Section 241, as applied against the plaintiff class, was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, forbidding its enforcement against them. Mississippi then requested the case be reheard by the full Fifth Circuit, which granted the petition on Sept. 28, 2023.
On Dec. 6, 2023, LWV Mississippi, LWVUS, and 11 other civil rights organizations filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs. The brief argued that Section 241’s permanent disenfranchisement requirement served no valid purpose under the retributive theory of criminal justice, as the penalty of losing voting rights was applied to a wide variety of crimes ranging in severity, with different classes of victims.
The League also asserted that Supreme Court precedent upholding felony disenfranchisement was inapplicable here, as the controlling case concerned an Equal Protection Clause claim rather than a claim under the Eighth Amendment. Finally, the League and its co-amici argued Section 241 was a deliberate effort to exclude Black citizens from voting and that its disparate effect on Black Mississippians resulted in disenfranchisement and a continued diminishment of their political power and ability to participate in governing their state.
LWV Mississippi and LWVUS were represented in this matter by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.
LWV Timeline
Plaintiffs file lawsuit
6 Mississippians with felony convictions file a federal class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi asserting Mississippi’s lifetime ban on voting for citizens convicted of certain crimes is unconstitutional.
Court grants partial summary judgment to defendants
The district court rules that Section 241 does not violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The ruling also states Section 253 does not violate the First Amendment or the Equal Protection Clause for a lack of standards in rights restoration. The ruling denies summary judgment for whether Section 253 is unconstitutional because of racist intent.
Three-judge panel strikes down Section 241
A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the district court, ruling that Section 241 as applied to the plaintiff class is cruel and unusual punishment.
Fifth Circuit grants en banc rehearing
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals grants Mississippi’s request for a rehearing of the panel’s decision by all active judges on the court.
LWV files amicus brief
LWVUS and LWV Mississippi file an amicus brief supporting plaintiffs, arguing that, by depriving citizens of the fundamental right to vote for life, Mississippi’s lifetime felony disenfranchisement law constitutes an exceptionally harsh violation under the Eighth Amendment because voting is fundamental to life as an American citizen.
Circuit court of appeals reverses the three-judge panel
Sitting en banc, the Fifth Circuit reverses the panel, ruling that Section 241 does not violate the Eighth Amendment. The opinion states that disenfranchisement for felony convictions is not a punishment but is instead a regulation of voter eligibility, and that previous precedent does not justify overturning Section 241 on Eighth Amendment grounds.