OurTupelo

On Monday, Politico released a leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito which indicated the U.S. Supreme Court is ready to overturn Roe v. Wade, potentially ending the right to abortion in the United States and setting the stage for the procedure to become illegal in Mississippi and many other states. On Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of the document but said it does not represent the Court’s final position.

The justices’ votes could change, but if a similar opinion were ultimately adopted by the Court, it would overturn a nearly 50-year-old precedent upholding the right to an abortion in the United States. In Mississippi, a trigger law banning abortion in almost all cases would take effect soon after such a ruling.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Alito wrote in the draft, dated Feb. 10. “The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.”

Below, Mississippi Today has compiled answers to some commonly asked questions about the case. This post will be updated.

Q: The U.S. Supreme Court has voted privately to overturn Roe v. Wade. What does this mean?

A: In December, the Court held oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Mississippi asked the Court to overturn Roe, while Jackson Women’s Health Organization — the state’s only abortion clinic — asked the justices to reaffirm previous rulings supporting the right to abortion. Shortly after oral arguments in every case, the justices have a meeting called a conference in which they each discuss their stance. Politico reported that at the conference after Dobbs v. Jackson, Alito and four other Republican-appointed justices voted to overturn Roe. 

When the chief justice is in the majority, he assigns a colleague (or picks himself) to write the opinion. When he is not, the senior-most justice assigns the case. According to the leaked draft opinion, Alito was assigned to write for the majority to overturn Roe. 

Q: If the leaked document is a “draft majority opinion,” is the court’s decision final? 

A: No. The justices often complete many rounds of revisions before finalizing an opinion, especially in controversial cases. The author of an opinion may seek to make changes that could bring a colleague on board so that the final ruling has broader support, or they can make tweaks at the direction of a fellow member of the majority. Both the text of the opinion and the alignment of the votes could change, and on Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts said the leaked draft did not represent the Court’s final position. 

Q: When can we expect the Supreme Court to make a decision, then?

A: The Court generally releases rulings on more controversial cases late in its term, which is set to end in June. Most court-watchers expect a ruling in Dobbs by late June, though it could come before then. 

Q: What law is at the center of the case?

A: A 2018 Mississippi law that prohibited abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, called the Gestational Age Act. This law permitted abortions after 15 weeks only in cases of medical emergency or “severe fetal abnormality.” The law was a direct challenge to Supreme Court precedent because previous rulings have upheld the right to an abortion up until fetal viability — generally at about 24 weeks of pregnancy — when the fetus can survive outside of the womb. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans found the Mississippi law unconstitutional, and it has never taken effect. Mississippi asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe to uphold the 15-week ban. 

Q: Is abortion currently legal in Mississippi?

A: Yes. Abortion is currently legal up to 20 weeks of pregnancy in Mississippi. The clinic at the center of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, provides abortions up to 16 weeks of pregnancy. About 2,600 abortions were provided in the state in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Unless the Supreme Court formally issues an opinion overturning Roe, it remains the law of the land. 

READ MORE: Who gets abortions in Mississippi?

Q: Can I get abortion pills in Mississippi?

Yes. Jackson Women’s Health Organization offers medication abortions up to 11 weeks of pregnancy. Medication abortions account for seventy percent of all abortions in Mississippi. The process involves multiple pills with two kinds of medication, Mifepristone and Misoprostol, which cause a pregnancy to stop growing and trigger cramping and bleeding, similar to a miscarriage. The Food and Drug Administration permits medication abortions to be provided through telemedicine, but Mississippi bans that practice, so patients must visit a provider in person.

Q: If Roe is overturned, what does that mean in Mississippi?

A: Mississippi is one of 13 states with a “trigger law,” meaning abortion would become almost immediately illegal in almost all cases if Roe is overturned. The law allows abortions only “where necessary for the preservation of the mother’s life or where the pregnancy was caused by rape.” It does not mention incest and specifices that the exemption for rape applies “only if a formal charge of rape has been filed with an appropriate law enforcement official.” Passed in 2007, the law takes effect only if the Attorney General of Mississippi determines that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe and would likely not find the ban unconstitutional. 

Q: If the court does overturn Roe, is abortion illegal across the United States?

A: No. If the Court overturns Roe, there is no right to abortion in the United States, so states are free to restrict and ban it. But states can also keep it legal, and about 20 Democratic-controlled states have taken steps to protect abortion in state law. With almost every southern state set to restrict abortion if Roe is overturned, Mississippi reproductive rights advocates believe southern Illinois could become the closest destination for Mississippians seeking abortions. 

Q: What did Roe v. Wade establish?

A: Roe v. Wade established a constitutional right to abortion. The Supreme Court found in a 7-2 opinion that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment contained an inherent “right to privacy” that protects a person’s right to choose abortion. The Court ruled that abortion could not be restricted during the first trimester and that during the second trimester the state could intervene only to protect the mother’s health. During the third trimester, states could pass restrictions but must always include an exemption to protect the life of the mother.  

Q: What did Planned Parenthood v. Casey establish?

A: By the 1980s, the anti-abortion movement was mounting challenges to abortion access around the country. In Pennsylvania, lawmakers passed a series of restrictions, including a requirement that married women notify their husbands of a planned abortion and a 24-hour waiting period. Planned Parenthood sued over the rules and asked the Court to determine whether they violated Roe. In its 1992 ruling, the Court reaffirmed Roe but also upheld all of Pennsylvania’s rules (except the requirement that women notify their husbands), opening the door to a new wave of abortion restrictions across the country. The Court established a new principle that restrictions on abortion are permitted so long as they do not impose an “undue burden” on someone seeking the procedure before fetal viability.

Q. How is Dr. Dobbs involved?

A: The case is named for Mississippi’s state health officer, Dr. Thomas Dobbs, but that doesn’t mean he was the architect of the 15-week ban or Mississippi’s request that the Supreme Court overturn Roe. The Mississippi State Department of Health, which he leads, regulates abortion clinics, so the 15-week ban would be enforced by his department. To challenge the law, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization had to sue his agency. 

Dr. Dobbs addressed this question on Twitter on April 24. “Why is the Supreme Court case named Dobbs vs Jackson Women’s Health?” he wrote. “Based on sovereign immunity protections plaintiffs must sue the head of the regulatory authority, which in this case is the State Health Officer, my current role.”

Q. In what circumstances would an abortion still be allowed in Mississippi if Roe is overturned?

A: Very few. The state’s trigger law would take effect 10 days after the state attorney general formally determined Roe had been overturned. That law allows abortions only to save “the mother’s life” or in cases of rape, but only when the rape has been reported to the police. It does not allow exceptions for incest, maternal health short of a life-threatening situation, or severe fetal abnormalities. The law also punishes people who perform abortions (“except the pregnant woman”) with one to 10 years in prison.

Q: Will this affect the availability of birth control/IUDs?

A: The short answer is no, at least not immediately. If the Court ultimately adopts Alito’s opinion or something similar, access to birth control and IUDs in Mississippi won’t be affected unless legislators pass a new law. Mississippi’s trigger law only applies to abortions, not birth control.

The longer answer is that advocates in Mississippi and around the country are concerned about what the fall of Roe would mean for contraceptive access. Opponents of abortion have sometimes sought to blur the line between that procedure, Plan B, and intrauterine devices (IUDs) — a form of long-acting birth control that prevents fertilization and thus pregnancy after sex. In Missouri, lawmakers recently tried (unsuccessfully) to redefine IUDs as “abortifacients” to stop Medicaid from paying for them. 

The founders of Converge, the reproductive health nonprofit now administering Title X family planning funds in Mississippi, recently told Mississippi Today that they want to make sure Mississippians know that birth control is legal. 

“If Roe is overturned, family planning care is probably next on the agenda,” co-founder Jamie Bardwell said.

Do you have more questions? Ask them here:

The post The Supreme Court is expected to overturn Roe v. Wade. Here’s what you need to know. appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Legislative leaders in Mississippi’s long-running efforts to ban abortion were pleased by news the nation’s high court appears poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, perturbed by the way the court’s decision was leaked, and looking ahead to banning abortion drugs or making other changes.

“I am thrilled by the news,” said Rep. Becky Currie, R-Brookhaven. “I hate how it has come out. I hesitate a little bit on celebrating until we see a full report from the court … But I think putting it back in the states’ hands for individual states to decide is what is best. I think it should have always been that way.”

Currie in 2018 authored House Bill 1510, a ban on abortions after 15 weeks, which is now before the nation’s high court in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. On Monday night, Politico reported it obtained a leaked draft U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion that would overturn the 49-year-old landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision and allow states to regulate — or ban — abortions.

READ MORE: Report: U.S. Supreme Court set to overturn Roe v. Wade in Mississippi abortion case

Mississippi is one of 13 states that has a law on the books that would be triggered if Roe is overturned. That 2007 law would ban abortions in most cases in Mississippi. The state Legislature also passed another law — being blocked by a federal court — that would ban abortions at six weeks.

It would appear the decades-long push by conservative lawmakers in Mississippi is nearly won. But Currie and Sen. Joey Fillingane, R-Sumrall, another anti-abortion advocate, said there would likely still be work for the Republican supermajority state Legislature. Both said they would focus on banning abortion-inducing drugs.

“Depending on the outcome from the court, and if in fact abortions are outlawed in Mississippi, then the issue of chemical abortions, with drugs being overnighted from out of state, would certainly be fair game to address,” Fillingane said.

Currie said she “absolutely” would support a state ban on abortion drugs.

“You can go in at 10 weeks or earlier in a pregnancy and have a choice between the medication and the procedure, and I think that’s something that needs to be addressed,” said Currie, who is a registered nurse. “… I think that causes some big problems, when you give a woman a handful of medicine to go home and expel a child.”

Currie said she’s already seen reports about Congress attempting to codify the right to abortion that the Roe v. Wade decision had provided in federal law.

“That makes me very worried,” Currie said. “There are still hurdles in Washington, D.C. I perceive this being an issue that they would get rid of the filibuster over.”

Currie, Fillingane and others were angered at the unprecedented leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion, saying it was likely from abortion rights supporters hoping to change the majority opinion of the high court.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves addressed this on social media.

“Everyone is rightly outraged over the alleged leak in the MS abortion case,” Reeves posted on Twitter. “Let’s think bigger. For decades, America has been uniquely radical in the West. Our abortion laws look like China & N. Korea. Please pray for wisdom and courage for (the U.S. Supreme Court). Countless lives can be saved!”

House Speaker Philip Gunn on Tuesday tweeted: “MS House Republicans led to protect the unborn with the passage of HB1510, now on review in Dobbs. Their efforts put us in a position to protect unborn lives. While I condemn the leak, I pray the Supreme Court will stand up for the sanctity of life and overturn Roe.”

Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann in a statement said: “Personally and religiously, I am pro-life. I am very hopeful Mississippi will prevail in this case. This important constitutional decision to restore our state’s rights, however, must not be tainted by unethical and criminal leaks. Any effort to use political pressure to thwart the judicial branch of our government is unacceptable and dangerous.”

The post What’s next if Mississippi abortion ruling overturns Roe? appeared first on Mississippi Today.

On Monday, Politico released a leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito which indicated the U.S. Supreme Court is ready to overturn Roe v. Wade, potentially ending the right to abortion in the United States and setting the stage for the procedure to become illegal in Mississippi and many other states. On Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of the document but said it does not represent the Court’s final position.

The justices’ votes could change, but if a similar opinion were ultimately adopted by the Court, it would overturn a nearly 50-year-old precedent upholding the right to an abortion in the United States. In Mississippi, a trigger law banning abortion in almost all cases would take effect soon after such a ruling.

Mississippi Today wants to know what questions you have about the case.

The post What are your questions about where Mississippi’s abortion case stands? appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The U.S. Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, likely ending the right to abortion in the United States and all but ensuring that the procedure becomes illegal in Mississippi and many other states, Politico reported Monday night.

Politico obtained a draft majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito and labeled “Opinion of the Court,” in which the justices sided with the state of Mississippi in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Alito writes in the draft document, referring to the 1992 case that mostly upheld the right to abortion. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

In a statement, the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office, which argued the state’s position before the Supreme Court, said the Politico report and the opinion to which it linked could not be verified.

“We will let the Supreme Court speak for itself and wait for the Court’s official opinion,” Attorney General Lynn Fitch said.

The Court’s opinion on the case was widely expected to come in June. The document obtained by Politico is a draft that could change before the Court’s final ruling. The leak of the document is the first time in modern history that a Court opinion has become public before it issues its ruling, Politico reported. 

If ultimately adopted by the Court, the ruling would overturn a 49-year-old precedent, arguing that the 7-2 decision in 1973 was “egregiously wrong from the start.”

Mississippi is one of several states with “trigger laws” that will automatically ban abortion, with few exceptions, if the Court overturns Roe.

The Washington, D.C.-based news organization reported that during an initial vote on the case after oral arguments in December, Alito was joined by conservative justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas. The alignment could change before the opinion is finalized, and justices often make multiple rounds of revisions before releasing a ruling. 

Politico reported that the three Democratic-appointed justices, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, are working on one or more draft dissent opinions. 

The publication reported that the position of Chief Justice John Roberts, who has shown more reticence than his fellow Republican appointees to overturn past rulings on abortion, is unclear.

The case stems from a 2018 Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down the law, finding that it ran afoul of the right to an abortion before fetal viability. Mississippi appealed that decision, and the Supreme Court announced it would hear the case in May 2021.

During oral arguments in December, Mississippians on both sides of the issue rallied in Jackson. 

At downtown Jackson’s Smith Park, the “Abortion Freedom Fighters” rally drew about 100 people.

“Mississippi has always been counted out, but today we showed not just the Supreme Court but the governor — we’ve shown people that we are not going to let y’all make decisions on our bodies,” said Valencia Robinson, CEO and founder of Mississippi in Action. “Women, pregnant people, nobody. Because if you’re taking one right away, you’re going to start trying to take other rights away.”

Outside the abortion clinic at the center of the Supreme Court case – the only such clinic in the state – the “Pink House defenders” were guarding the parking lot as they do every day. About 40 anti-abortion protesters prayed, their mouths covered in red tape printed with the word “Life.”

“God almighty visited you and gave you a baby. Will you save it today? Will you love it?” said Coleman Boyd, a regular protester at the clinic. 

The post Report: U.S. Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade in Mississippi abortion case appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The post Marshall Ramsey: TANF Storm appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The stink of the largest public embezzlement scheme in Mississippi history goes all the way to the Governor’s Mansion.

And two years after the scandal exploded, there’s no evidence that those at the highest levels are being held accountable or that the system they manipulated is being changed to protect taxpayers in the future.

Tens of millions of dollars in federal welfare funds were misspent or stolen by state officials and contractors. Most reprehensible, that money was specifically intended to help the poorest people in the nation’s poorest state.

Bombshell revelations in Mississippi Today’s “The Backchannel” investigation, which revealed former Gov. Phil Bryant’s role in the scandal through many of his never-before-published text messages and other communications, raise grave questions about the origins of the misspending and the thoroughness of the investigation that ensued.

Are those truly responsible for the fraud, including those who allowed it to happen, really being held accountable, and why aren’t our leaders doing something — anything — to fix this?

Text messages show that Gov. Bryant — who had the sole, statutory responsibility to oversee the policy and spending of the state’s welfare agency during his eight years in office — was at best asleep at the wheel while millions in taxpayer funds designated for poor Mississippians flew to the pocketbooks of many people in his orbit. He admitted as much in our three-hour interview on April 2.

“Look, I’ll take my responsibility,” Bryant acknowledged. “Yeah, I was the governor. I wish I had been able to catch it.”

The Mississippi Today investigation also revealed that Bryant, after he left office, appeared poised to accept stock in a company that received welfare funds in exchange for the help he provided the company while he was governor. Bryant now says he had not carefully read the text messages he received or gave much thought to his own replies.

“Now I can clearly see why you’re following those trails. And it doesn’t look good,” Bryant said. “Should I have caught it? Absolutely. I should’ve caught it. Was I extremely busy as governor? I can’t even describe to you what it is like on a daily basis as governor.”

Is the excuse of being inattentive or busy enough to absolve the governor of blame or allow him to avoid a more thorough investigation? His administration never would have been that lenient on welfare recipients allegedly cheating the system.

Another major revelation from “The Backchannel” is that Bryant pulled strings with welfare officials to get help for his troubled great-nephew — all while setting welfare policy that made it nearly impossible for other poor Mississippians to get the same kind of assistance.

“I remember struggling trying to help this young man,” Bryant told Mississippi Today of helping his great-nephew. “I didn’t know he was out of prison. I don’t remember the timeline, but there was no, again, no benefit to us whatsoever of helping this child except trying to save his life. I mean, Anna, if that’s a bad thing …”

State Auditor Shad White, who led the state criminal investigation without giving federal prosecutors any heads up before the first arrests were made, told Mississippi Today in October 2021 that he had not seen evidence that Bryant broke any law.

But White’s deep personal and political ties to Bryant — and the timing and announcement of the arrests more than two years ago — raise serious questions about the impartiality of that investigation. White, a former Bryant staffer and campaign manager who the governor later appointed state auditor, said he believed it was the welfare director’s duty to reject any improper requests from the governor, not the governor’s responsibility to know agency spending regulations.

Some of the loudest public outcry following our reporting raises the questions: Shouldn’t Bryant, a former state auditor who himself probed federal welfare grants, have known the agency spending regulations? And could White possibly have conducted a fair investigation of his political mentor? 

Meanwhile, Mississippi lawmakers, who could drastically increase scrutiny of future welfare spending with a few meetings and the stroke of a pen, have ducked for cover, making no serious efforts in three legislative sessions to determine how this fraud occurred under their noses or to pass laws to ensure it won’t happen again.

Most members of the U.S. Congress, who annually appropriate the federal welfare funds that were stolen, don’t even appear to be aware that massive welfare fraud occurred in Mississippi and is almost certainly occurring in many other states.

Neither state nor federal lawmakers have held a single hearing to learn more about the depths of the fraud, how they could keep it from happening again or how to better spend the welfare money in the first place.

This fraud went under the radar for years because neither the state nor the federal government required Mississippi officials to show that the programs receiving welfare funds actually helped anyone. Regardless of how the funds were spent — and whether legal or not — the poor Mississippians who were supposed to receive the help got nothing. 

Current Gov. Tate Reeves and his state welfare leader have worked to assure the public they’ve added safeguards and stopped the generational rush of misspending at that agency. But they’re asking for a lot of faith from Mississippi taxpayers whose distrust of government was already high before Mississippi Today’s investigation.

When asked for comment on “The Backchannel” revelations about Bryant and what they say about the current welfare agency, Reeves said simply: “It is my view that that is an ongoing federal investigation, and it would not be appropriate for me to comment at this time.”

Those words aren’t likely to reassure Mississippi taxpayers.

An executive branch operating in secrecy misspent millions of dollars for personal or political gain while abandoning the state’s poor. State investigators made such questionable decisions during their probe that they are being publicly accused of a coverup. And lawmakers won’t pass laws to stop the fraud from occurring now and in the future.

Worst of all, the Mississippians who needed the stolen money the most were ignored. As far as we can tell, they’re still being ignored. How, in good conscience, can our elected officials continue to let this happen?

“There’s just such little oversight, so things like this (systemic fraud) can happen. It’s tragic and outrageous in light of the fact that families in Mississippi who live in poverty didn’t get the help they needed,” said Carol Burnett, founder of the Mississippi Low-Income Child Care Initiative.

Burnett continued: “The amount of flexibility states have with this program could be used to the benefit of people who need it. The ultimate litmus test, I think, should be the state’s poverty rate. What have we as a state done to reduce poverty rather than just move people off the welfare rolls? Unfortunately, that poverty rate hasn’t moved really at all.”

Note: This editorial follows Mississippi Today’s “The Backchannel” investigation, which revealed former Gov. Phil Bryant’s involvement in the state’s sprawling welfare scandal.

The post Officials stole taxpayer money from the poor. Mississippians deserve answers and accountability. appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Mississippi Today reporters Bobby Harrison and Geoff Pender interview – or more accurately listen – as longtime state Sen. Hob Bryan of Amory vents about massive tax cuts passed in the 2022 legislative session. Bryan says the state has too many infrastructure, education and other needs to be making such huge cuts in revenue.

The post Podcast: Sen. Hob Bryan discusses 2022 legislative session appeared first on Mississippi Today.

On this episode of Mississippi Stories, Mississippi Today Editor-At-Large Marshall Ramsey sits down with Rita Soronen, President and CEO of the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption. Leading the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, a national nonprofit public charity, since 2001 and the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption-Canada since 2004, Soronen works to find adoptive families for the more than 150,000 children waiting in North America’s foster care systems.

Under her leadership, the Foundation has significantly increased its grant-making while developing strategic initiatives that act on the urgency of the issue. In 2021, the Foundation dedicated more than $40.9 million to grants and award-winning programs, such as Wendy’s Wonderful Kids, Adoption-Friendly Workplace and National Adoption Day.

Additionally, through public service announcements, social media campaigns, articles, events, sponsorships and more, the Foundation is building awareness around the growing need for foster care adoption. Marshall caught up with Soronen when she was in Mississippi to announce a partnership with the Mississippi Department of Children Protection Services.

The post Mississippi Stories: Rita Soronen appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Gov. Tate Reeves has been vocal in his opposition to the teaching of critical race theory and his support of the nation’s and state’s “patriotic” history.

Critical race theory, normally taught at the college level, explores the impact of race on various aspects of society. Opponents, though, say critical race theory is an effort to divide the country along racial lines. While opposing critical race theory, the Republican Reeves has long advocated for the teaching of “patriotic” history or history that portrays the state and nation in a positive light.

Reeves, a self-proclaimed “numbers guy” who worked in banking and finance before entering politics in his late 20s, offered a history lesson recently when vetoing a bill that would ensure people whose felony convictions were expunged would regain their right to vote.

“Felony disenfranchisement is an animating principle of the social contract at the heart of every great republic dating back to the founding of ancient Greece and Rome,” Reeves wrote in his veto message. “In America, such laws date back to the colonies and the eventual founding of our Republic. Since statehood, in one form or another, Mississippi law has recognized felony disenfranchisement.”

Granted, the loss of voting rights for those convicted of felonies was once common in America. But most states — at least 40 of them — now restore voting rights to people convicted of felonies at some point after they complete their sentence.

And perhaps people convicted of felonies in ancient Rome and Greece also lost their voting rights. Perhaps, a question for the governor is whether the slaves in ancient Rome and Greece could vote.

In Mississippi, the issue of felony disenfranchisement intersects with the state’s sordid history of slavery and systematic racism. The narrative of the day made it clear that felony disenfranchisement was among a litany of provisions placed in Mississippi’s 1890 Constitution to keep African Americans from voting.

At the time, the Mississippi Supreme Court said the disfranchisement of felons was an effort “to obstruct the exercise of the franchise by the negro race” by targeting “the offenses to which its weaker members were prone.” The provision’s intent was the same as the poll tax, the literacy test and other Jim Crow-era provisions that sought to prevent African Americans from voting.

Heck, murder and rape — the two crimes that would be disenfranchising if any were — were not listed in the 1890 Constitution as disenfranchising. They were added much later, in the 1960s.

While most states have moved on from lifetime bans on voting for people convicted of felonies, Mississippi holds tightly to the process placed in its 1890 Constitution. Under that process, a person either has to obtain a gubernatorial pardon or approval by a two-thirds vote of both chambers of the Legislature to regain the right to vote.

Because of that difficult process, Mississippi leads the nation in percentage of residents who have lost their right to vote. This past session, the Legislature passed bills restoring voting rights to only five Mississippians. Reeves opted not to sign those bills, instead allowing them to become law without his signature.

The bill Reeves did veto would have clarified that people whose felony convictions are expunged by a judge also would regain the right to vote. It should be pointed out only a limited number of crimes under specified conditions are eligible for expungement.

At any rate, some jurisdictions are restoring voting rights when crimes are expunged. Others are not. The bill was an attempt to clarify what many said was the Legislature’s intent — to restore voting rights when crimes were expunged.

But Reeves said to restore the rights, the state Constitution needs to be amended through first legislative action and then a vote of the people.

There are legal experts who agree with Reeves’ assessment that a change to the Constitution is needed to bypass the Legislature or a gubernatorial pardon to restore voting rights. Others do not believe a change to the Constitution is required to do so.

Still, Reeves used the occasion of the veto to brandish his version of history, which was absent the racial components surrounding Mississippi’s felony disenfranchisement rules.

When the Legislature debated a bill that supporters said would prohibit the teaching of critical race theory in Mississippi classrooms, some voiced concerns that passage of the anti-critical race theory bill would prevent the teaching of the impact of race on the state’s and nation’s history.

Supporters of the anti-critical race theory bill said it was not their intent to downplay the impact of race.

But Reeves, who signed the critical race theory bill and who touts the importance of teaching “patriotic” history, seems intent on ignoring the racial component of the state’s felony disenfranchisement provision.

The post Reeves ignores racist history of state’s felony voting ban with vetoes appeared first on Mississippi Today.