186
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 22 points 2 weeks ago

Because he was convicted in New York and according to Florida law the state that he was convicted ins laws apply as far as his voting rights.

[-] BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

The thing is, which law? I can't find it. Florida's website redirects to their constitution and their constitution. Doesn't. Say. That.

It doesn't carve out that exception, and there would need to be a law that automatically reinstated him instead of just never removing him. Because a law that doesn't remove him, violates their constitution.

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago

I don't know, I was parroting the article.

[-] BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I know. I'm just annoyed that no news source has backed up this claim with the actual law that supposedly exempts him.

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah it's really interesting to me that you weren't able to find it. Because that's not the first time I've read that.

And law libraries are pretty thorough.

I've done some digging in them myself.

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago
[-] BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

That's the thing I've read before, but does

"No person convicted of a felony, or adjudicated in this or any other state to be mentally incompetent, shall be qualified to vote or hold office until restoration of civil rights or removal of disability. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any disqualification from voting arising from a felony conviction shall terminate and voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence including parole or probation."

mean that it excludes it when the other state doesn't have a rule removing rights? Maybe a lawyer can explain it to me, but following the links to the actual law seems to contradict what's on the page from how I understand it. Also what's in the page seemed to get edited there as soon as people started asking about it.

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

"Until restoration of civil rights" is the important bit. Since NY hasn't removed his civil rights he doesn't have to "restore them".

[-] BrokenGlepnir@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I think the important part is that it's florida that'd be removing them, and the rest of it that I didn't copy is how florida restores them. This is Florida's constitution. If we interpreted that way, he can never get them back. Florida took them away and he cannot have them back until NY restores them, which they can't

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Well that's the thing Florida doesn't remove them in the first place if the other state doesn't. Your interpretation would create a legal catch-22 which doesn't make sense per the default of people having rights.

this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
186 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2948 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS