Ralph
Ellison immortalized "Juneteenth," the annual celebration
of the anniversary of June 19, 1865, when the enslaved Africans
in Texas were actually emancipated, in his posthumous novel
of the same name.
Ellison's
title refers to the date when Union General Gordon Grander rode
horseback into Galveston, Texas and announced to nearly 250,000
slaves that President Abraham Lincoln, with a stroke of a pen
on the Emancipation Proclamation, had declared them free on
January 1, 1863 – more than two years earlier.
Upon
hearing the news, the reaction of the newly freed slaves wasn't
surprising: they dropped their plows and celebrated their
freedom.
In
reality, however, the Emancipation Proclamation did not free
any slaves, its terms were carefully limited to those areas
under the control of the Confederacy and thus beyond the reach
of federal law.
Indeed,
it wasn't until 2 ½ years after the signing of the Emancipation
Proclamation, when a regiment of the Union military, led by
Granger, arrived in Texas with the news of slavery's end, and
the power to enforce the proclamation, that Lincoln's proclamation
finally made slaves free. This delay, Ellison said, is
a "symbolic acknowledgement that liberation is a never-ending
task of self, group and nation."
Today,
Juneteenth is a vivid historical example that obtaining rights
at law does not necessarily confer rights that have actual force.
It is for this reason that Juneteenth celebrants are often conflicted.
On
one hand, Juneteenth marks the Republicans' critical recognition
that unless action was taken to safeguard the freedmen's status,
Democrats would force Blacks back into slavery, thereby sustaining
the economic dispute that led to Civil War. In recognition
of the entrenched white resistance to Black emancipation, the
post-Civil War Congress enacted the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and
Fifteenth Amendments, which ended slavery, made former slaves
citizens, and protected them from future white supremacy by
granting them the right to vote free of racial discrimination.
On
the other hand, Juneteenth marks the time when the newly enfranchised
Black population in the South met massive resistance from whites.
Among other things, this resistance took the form of a century
of poll taxes, grandfather clauses, literacy requirements, and
disfranchisement policies.
The
struggle continued with the passage of the Voting Rights Act
of 1965 and now many, but not all, barriers used to prevent
Blacks from the effective use of their votes are unconstitutional
or illegal. One vestige of slavery, however, endures:
felon disfranchisement laws.
Felon
disfranchisement laws are state statutes that prohibit people
with felony convictions from voting. In an attempt to
prevent newly-freed Blacks from voting after the Civil War,
many state legislators tailored their felon disfranchisement
laws to require the loss of voting rights only for those offenses
committed mostly by Blacks.
For
example, the 1890 Mississippi constitutional convention required
disfranchisement for such crimes as theft, burglary and receiving
money under false pretenses, but not for robbery or murder.
These intentionally discriminatory laws were guided by the belief
that Blacks engaged in crime were more likely to commit furtive
offenses than the more robust crimes committed by whites.
Through the convoluted "reasoning" of this provision,
one would be disfranchised for stealing a chicken, but not for
killing the chicken's owner. Many other states, from New
York to Alabama, have also intentionally and effectively utilized
felon disfranchisement laws to prevent Blacks and other
racial minorities from voting.
Not
surprisingly, felon disfranchisement statutes, as intended,
have served to disproportionately weaken the voting power of
Black and Latino communities. This disparate effect results
largely from the disproportionate enforcement of the "war
on drugs" in Black and Latino communities, which has expanded
exponentially the class of persons subject to disfranchisement.
Today,
with more than 2.3 million Americans incarcerated, the effects
of our nation's reliance on mass incarceration as a primary
means of control in the era of the "war on drugs"
is more profound than ever. As a result roughly 5 million
Americans nationwide – an overwhelming number of whom are Black
and Latino – are disfranchised. Nowhere are the effects
of felon disfranchisement more prominent than in the Black community,
where more than 1.5 million Black males, or no less than 13
percent of the adult Black population, are disfranchised.
The
felon disfranchisement phenomenon is most destructive in Black
and Latino neighborhoods because these communities are often
disproportionately
plagued with numerous socioeconomic ills – including concentrated
poverty and substandard housing, healthcare and education.
As a result, people in these communities have even less of an
opportunity to effect positive change through the political
process.
Not
only this, but felon disfranchisement laws also serve to discourage
eligible and future voters from exercising the learned behavior
of voting. In doing so, these laws create a culture of
political nonparticipation that erodes civic engagement and
marginalizes the votes and voices of community members who remain
engaged, but who are deprived of the collective power of the
votes of disfranchised relatives and neighbors.
Although
common in the United States, felon disfranchisement statutes
are not a necessary feature of our participatory democracy.
Indeed, Maine and Vermont have no such statutes and permit all
people with felony convictions – including those both currently
incarcerated and formerly incarcerated – to vote. Some
states restore voting rights to formerly incarcerated persons
once they have served their entire prison sentence. But
similar to the slaves in Texas, many formerly incarcerated persons
are not informed that their voting rights have been restored,
and although technically free to vote, remain voteless.
In other states, the difficulty of navigating one's way through
the impenetrable restoration process turns many eligible, formerly
incarcerated voters away.
Unfortunately,
more than a century after General Granger announced to the slaves
in Texas that they were free, and nearly 43 years after the
passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, increasing numbers
of Blacks and Latinos nationwide are losing their voting rights
daily.
Today,
there are new frontiers for the expansion of civil rights, and
old battles that remain unfinished. Reform of felon disfranchisement
laws is long overdue.
Ellison
remarked that "there've been a heap of Juneteenths gone
by and there'll be a heap more before we're free."
143 Juneteenth anniversaries certainly constitutes a "heap."
In the spirit of Juneteenth's legacy, and in the interest of
experiencing the illusive freedom that Ellison referenced, it
is time for the United States to break down the walls that literally
lock citizens out of the political process so that next Juneteenth
we can move one step closer to truly celebrating freedom.
Ryan
Paul Haygood is an Assistant Counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense
and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF).
Click
here to contact Mr. Haygood.