• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • Gplus
  • Foursquare
  • Mail
Phone: 612-605-4098 | Fax: 612-605-4099   
Halunen Law
  • About
    • Why Halunen Law?
    • Community Connections
  • Our Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Employment Law
      • Employment Law Overview
      • Employment Law FAQs
      • Whistleblower Law
        • Whistleblower Protection
        • Severance Negotiations
        • Whistleblower Retailiation
        • Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002
      • Wrongful Termination
      • Employer Retaliation
      • Discrimination
      • Severance
      • Hostile Work Environment
      • Agreements & Contracts
      • Sexual Harassment
      • Wage & Hour Violations
      • Class Action Lawsuits
    • Consumer Class Actions
      • Consumer Class Actions Overview
      • Consumer Class Action FAQs
      • Defective Building Products
      • Supplements & Remedies
      • Electronics & Appliances
      • Financing, Credit & Insurance
      • Deceptive Food Labeling
      • Pricing Scams
      • Faulty Vehicles
    • Qui Tam / Whistleblower
      • Qui Tam/ Whistleblower Overview
      • FCA / Qui Tam Whistleblower
      • False Claims Act FAQs
      • CFTC Whistleblower
      • IRS Whistleblower
      • SEC Whistleblower
      • Halunen Law’s Active Whistleblower Cases
      • Qui Tam State Statutes
  • Press
    • News
    • Media
  • Blogs
    • Whistleblower Blog
    • Employment Blog
    • Consumer Blog
  • Contact
    • Chicago
    • Minneapolis
  • Search
  • Menu
Blog - Latest News
Halunen Law - Voting Barriers for Persons with Disailities

Voting Barriers for Persons with Disabilities

February 15, 2017/in BLOG, NEWS /by Halunen Law

Halunen Law - Voting Barriers for Persons with Disailities Halunen Law’s João da Fonseca reports on an important presentation “Addressing Barriers to Voting by Persons with Disabilities.”

Minnesota Chapter Sponsors CLE and Webinar Addressing Barriers to Voting by Persons with Disabilities

By João da Fonseca

Protecting the right of every American to vote is most fundamental to a robust democratic process. Yet, this right has not been enjoyed by every American. For example, only sixty years ago, African Americans were mostly disenfranchised because of legal mechanisms, such as poll taxes, designed to prohibit them from voting. This, despite the constitutional force of the Fifteenth Amendment, which was passed in the 1870s with the explicit purpose of securing the rights of African American men to vote. Things only changed in the 1960s with the passage of the Voting Rights Act, which dismantled these longstanding barriers to voting. Despite these significant victories, up to this day, there remain members of our population who are deprived of the right to vote, including persons with cognitive disabilities.

Continuing the Minnesota Chapter’s steadfast commitment to the rights of persons with disabilities, a dynamic panel presented “Barriers to Voting by Persons with Disabilities” on October 4, 2016. The presentation was broadcast nationally from the Minneapolis office of Faegre Baker Daniels to an engaged audience. The panel featured United States District Judge Donovan W. Frank, Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, and Professor Elizabeth R. Schiltz of the University of St. Thomas School of Law, and was moderated by United States Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau.

The legal landscape for the rights of persons with disabilities begins with the United States Constitution, which on one hand protects the right to vote as a liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment but on the other hand allows states to set voting qualifications under Article I, Section 4. This tension oftentimes leads to legislation that unduly limits the right to vote of persons with disabilities.

While many states have lifted restrictions on voting based on ownership of property due to fear of low voting turnout, not so for persons with disabilities, recounted Professor Schiltz. Rather, these persons were considered “mentally impaired,” “idiots,” or “insane people,” and, for these reasons, not allowed to vote. Thirty-eight states still have constitutional provisions disenfranchising persons with cognitive disabilities. And oftentimes, state laws ignore or contradict constitutional provisions.

In Minnesota, Article VII, Section 1 of the Minnesota Constitution prohibits persons under guardianship from voting. However, Minnesota Statutes section 524.5-120(14) gives a “ward or protected person” the “right to . . . vote, unless restricted by the court.” In 2012, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Ritchie, 890 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (D. Minn. 2012), the Minnesota Voters Alliance brought multiple claims against Minnesota’s Secretary of State in federal court, including a claim challenging the constitutionality of Article VII, Section 1, under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of both the United States and Minnesota Constitutions. Plaintiffs also challenged the constitutionality of Minnesota Statutes section 524.5-301, which establishes guardianship by appointment by a parent, spouse, or court, under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. After a review and analysis of Minnesota’s election laws, Judge Frank dismissed plaintiffs’ case, ruling that “the constitutional prohibition against voting based on guardianship status applies only when there as been an individualized judicial finding of incapacity to vote.” Minn. Voters Alliance, 890 F. Supp. 2d at 1117.

Barriers to voting in Minnesota are also dictated by whether there are procedures in place during an election facilitating access to voting and guaranteeing that persons receive the assistance they need during and prior to election day. Secretary of State Simon shared that, overall, Minnesota has been faring well on that front, as evidenced by positive survey results conducted across a diverse range of polling places in the state. He acknowledged, however, there is much work to be done, including upgrading election equipment that is now becoming obsolete.

Pearls of wisdom came also from the audience as Pamela Hoopes, a civil rights attorney at the Disability Law Center, shared practical insights on how to think about legal options to improve voting rights, special challenges, and difficulties. The panel ended with a friendly announcement by Judge Frank about the Disability Law Center’s toll-free hotline, which is available for callers who have questions about their right to vote, in yet another meaningful gesture to ensure that persons with disabilities had the opportunity to vote in this year’s elections.

Reprinted from December 7, 2016 Bar Talk newsletter with permission from the Federal Bar Association.

Halunen Law - João da Fonseca João da Fonseca is a case manager at the law firm Halunen Law.
Learn more about João

Tags: Disability Law Center, Due Process Clauses, Equal Protection, Faegre Baker Daniels, Fifteenth Amendment, Judge Frank, Minnesota, Pamela Hoopes, Professor Schiltz, Secretary of State, United States Constitution, United States District Judge, United States Magistrate Judge, University of St. Thomas School of Law, Voting Rights Act
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Google+
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on Linkedin
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
You might also like
Halunen Law - Reanimating Dead Law Reanimating Dead Law
Halunen Law - Walk-to-End Halunen Law’s Jennifer M. Vukelich-Seltz takes steps to help find a cure for Alzheimer’s
For-Profit School Scrutinized for Misleading Students For-Profit Schools Under Scrutiny
It May be Illegal for Car Wash Receipts to Expire Halunen Attorney Benjamin Kwan Serves as President of Minnesota Asian Pacific American Bar Association
Halunen Law - Employment In Minnesota, Is Workplace Bullying Against the Law?
Halunen Law - False Claims Act Serves Citizens Blowing Whistle Forged Under Civil War Fire, The False Claims Act Continues To Serve As Basis For Private Citizens To Blow The Whistle On Would-Be Fraudsters Of The Government Trust
It May be Illegal for Car Wash Receipts to Expire Consumers Take a Stand - Is it legal for car wash receipts to expire?
It May be Illegal for Car Wash Receipts to Expire Halunen Law attorney Benjamin Kwan moderates recent jobs panel for law students

Top Stories


In 2015 Six Halunen Attorneys Named SUPERLAWYERS And RISING STARS
Halunen & Associates Represents Whistleblower in $1.5 Billion Case Against Abbott Labs
Halunen Client Wins Nearly $400,000 Verdict Against Globe University

Request a Free Evaluation

Name (required)

Email (required)

Phone

Legal Issue/Question

Practice Areas

  • Class Action & Consumer Fraud Lawyers
  • Employment & Employee Rights Law Firm
  • Whistleblower Law Firm
  • Qui Tam/Fraud Against the Government Law Firm
  • Sexual Harassment Law Firm

Blog Posts

Halunen Law Partner Melissa Weiner Offers Expertise in New Mitchell Hamline Pilot Program
Halunen Law Partner and Chair of the Consumer Class Action practice group Melissa Weiner was pleased to provid...
Halunen Law Committed to the Environment
Focusing on our environmental impact and consequently readjusting the way we function in our workplace is one...
Halunen Law’s Susan Coler Provides Important Insight as Panelist on Recent National Employment Lawyer Association Presentation
Susan Coler, Halunen Law Partner and Chair of the False Claims Act Practice Group, recently spoke on a panel -...
Halunen Law Consumer Class Action Attorney Christopher Moreland Named Firm Partner
MINNEAPOLIS, MN — (April 6, 2018) Halunen Law is pleased to announce that Christopher Moreland was recently ...
Halunen Law Attorneys Selected to Minnesota Super Lawyers and Rising Star List
Halunen Law is pleased to announce that several of its attorneys were recently selected to the Minnesota Super...
Halunen Law Attorney Amy Boyle Featured in Minnesota Women Lawyers Series
Incorporated in 1972, Minnesota Women Lawyers (MWL) is an association of more than 1,300 attorneys, judges, la...
Emma Denny Testifies - on Workplace Safety and Respect
Emma Denny from our office provided expert testimony yesterday to the Minnesota House Subcommittee on workplac...
The Case Against Arbitration Clauses – How the Recent Revocation of CFPB’s Rule Harms Consumers
On November 22, 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) officially nullified its rule prohibitin...
What Constitutes Sexual Harassment? Attorney Clayton Halunen Weighs In
High profile sexual harassment cases and the burgeoning #MeToo movement are shining a spotlight on workplace ...
Five Things Every Woman Should Know About Employment Law
Number One: Basics about Gender Discrimination\r\n Employment in Minnesota is at-will, unless you are in a union...

Minneapolis Office

Halunen Law
IDS Center
80 South 8th Street #1650
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Phone: (612) 605-4098
Toll free: (866) 523-8533
Fax: (612) 605-4099

Chicago Office

Halunen Law
415 North LaSalle Street, Suite 300A
Chicago, IL 60654
Phone: (312) 222-0660
Fax (612) 605-4099

© 2017 Copyright - Halunen Law | Minneapolis Employment Attorneys
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
Whistleblower suit targets medical product firm Halunen Law - Whistleblower Suit Targets Medical Product Firm Halunen Law - Dilemma for National Guard Reservists & Veterans Put it on the Resume? The Ongoing Dilemma for National Guard Reservists and...
Scroll to top