Share and Follow
In Nashville, Tennessee, a new law has been enacted that reduces two major financial barriers for individuals with felony convictions seeking to regain their voting rights. Notably, Tennessee, unlike any other state, previously required these individuals to have fully paid their child support obligations.
The law, passed by the state’s Republican-dominated Legislature with support from Democrats, allows individuals to demonstrate that they have adhered to their child support orders for at least the past year, including through payment plans. Additionally, the legislation removes the requirement to pay off all court costs as a condition for restoring voting rights.
Advocates have long pushed for reforms to Tennessee’s voting rights restoration process, both in legislative sessions and the courts. They argue that the relaxation of these two requirements represents the most significant easing of restrictions on voting rights restoration in many years.
“This is a monumental and historic change,” stated Keeda Haynes, a senior attorney with Free Hearts, an advocacy organization comprised of formerly incarcerated women.
The legislation received overwhelming support, with most Republicans voting in favor and unanimous backing from Democrats. It was enacted immediately following the signature of Republican Governor Bill Lee last week.
“I think people are at a point where they want to just remove the barriers out of the way and allow people to be fully functional members of society,” said Democratic House Minority Leader Karen Camper, a bill sponsor.
Easing up after years
In 2023, the state decided gun rights were required to restore the right to vote, and shelved a paperwork process that didn’t require going to court. Election officials said a court ruling made the changes necessary, though voting rights advocates said officials misinterpreted the order.
Last year, lawmakers untangled voting and gun rights. But voting rights advocates opposed some of the bill’s other provisions, such as keeping the process in the courts, where costs can rack up if someone isn’t ruled indigent.
A Republican split
Easing up on the financial requirements uncommonly split legislative Republicans. For instance, Senate Speaker Randy McNally voted against it, while House Speaker Cameron Sexton supported it, noting that people aren’t getting forgiveness on making their payments.
“They need to continue paying that, and as long as they do, then there’s a possibility (to restore their voting rights),” Sexton said. “I really think that’s harder for people to argue against than maybe what something else was.”
Republican Rep. Johnny Garrett, who voted no, said in committee his vote would hinge on whether “there still can be an (child support) arrearage owed beyond that 12 months.”
For some, backed-up child support payments could reach hundreds or thousands of dollars, and court costs could be hundreds or thousands more, said Gicola Lane, Campaign Legal Center’s Restore Your Vote community partnership senior manager.
Advocates credited their narrowed focus, omitting goals such as automatic restoration of rights, no longer tying restitution payments to voting rights, or offering a path for certain people to restore their right who are permanently disenfranchised, including those convicted of voter fraud or most murder charges.
The bill passed the Senate last year and the House this year.
Two decades under the child support rule
Lawmakers gave the child support requirement final passage in 2006 within an overhaul bill that also created a voting rights restoration process outside of court. Critics said the child support rule penalized impoverished parents.
Democrats were then narrowly hanging onto legislative leadership in both chambers. Republicans held a slim Senate majority but GOP defectors voted for a Democratic speaker.
Last year marked the dismissal of a five-year-old federal lawsuit over Tennessee’s voting-rights restoration system. Free Hearts and the Campaign Legal Center represented plaintiffs in the long-delayed case, which saw some election policy changes along the way.
Roughly 184,000 people have completed supervision for felonies and their offenses don’t preclude them from restoring their voting rights, according to a plaintiffs expert’s 2023 estimate in the lawsuit. About one in 10 were estimated to have outstanding child support payments, and more than six in 10 owed court courts, restitution or both, the expert said.
Other states’ systems
Both Republican and Democratic-led states have eased the voting rights restoration process in recent years. Some states have added complexities.
In Florida, after voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2018 restoring the right to vote for people with felony convictions, the Republican-controlled Legislature watered that down by requiring payment of fines, fees and court costs.
Voting rights are automatically restored upon release in nearly half of states. In 15 others, it occurs after parole, probation or a similar period and sometimes requires paying outstanding court costs, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In Maine and Vermont, people with felonies keep their voting rights in prison, the NCSL says.
Ten other states including Tennessee require additional government action. Virginia ’s governor must intervene to restore voting rights of people convicted of felonies. In some states, including Tennessee, certain conviction types render someone ineligible.
However, Virginia lawmakers this year have passed a proposed state constitutional amendment to ask voters whether they want automatic voting rights restoration after someone is released from prison. Kentucky lawmakers have proposed a similar change for voters’ consideration that would automatically restore voting rights after certain completed sentences, including probation.