Virginia Governor Working at an Unrealistic Pace to Restore Felons' Voting Rights
In two months, Gov. Terry McAuliffe says he's reviewed and signed 13,000 individual executive orders.

For the second time this year, Gov. Terry McAuliffe is trying to assert his executive authority to restore the voting rights of released felons in Virginia.
After being told by the state Supreme Court that he did not have the authority to restore voting rights to all of Virginia's 200,000 ex-felons with a single stroke of his pen, McAuliffe says he's now going about the process one-by-one. On Monday in Richmond, McAuliffe announced that he'd already signed 13,000 individual orders to restore voting rights to former convicts, The Hill reports.
If that's true, he's doing it with unbelievable speed.
Here's the background: McAuliffe signed an executive order in April granting voting rights to an estimated 200,000 ex-felons living in Virginia. Republicans sued, and in July the state Supreme Court ruled that McAuliffe overstepped his authority.
"The Governor can use his clemency powers to mitigate a general rule of law on a case-by-case basis," Chief Justice Donald Lemons wrote in the majority opinion. "But that truism does not mean he can effectively rewrite the general rule of law and replace it with a categorical exception. The express power to make exceptions to a general rule of law does not confer an implied power to change the general rule itself."
Approximately 750 hours have passed since the state Supreme Court issued that ruling on July 22, telling McAuliffe he had to tackle this issue on a case-by-case basis.
Even if McAuliffe worked around-the-clock on nothing else since then, he would have had to evaluate about 17 ex-convicts per hour, every hour. That's an average of one case every three minutes or so, if he didn't take any breaks to eat or sleep.
He says he's passionate about this issue—that's fine, but even passion can't slow the passage of time.
When the Supreme Court decision was issued, the New York Times noted that McAuliffe would have to sign 385 orders per day for the rest of his term to restore voting rights to all 200,000 ex-convicts covered by his initial executive order. "Challenge accepted," seems to have been McAuliffe's response.
It's unknown whether Republicans will bring another legal challenge. If they do, math figures to be a central part of their case.
Aside from his tendency to overstep the limits of executive power (and perhaps the limits of human endurance), McAuliffe says all the right things about why he wants to restore felons' voting rights.
"These individuals are gainfully employed, they send their children and their grandchildren to our schools, they shop in our grocery stores and they pay taxes. I am not content to condemn them for eternity as inferior, second-class citizens," he said in a statement on Monday, echoing similar comments made in April when he signed the earlier order.
There are more than 2.2 million ex-convicts in America who cannot vote even though they've been released from prison. Ostensibly, they've paid their debt to society but they are still excluded from the political process. Unfortunately, the debate over whether ex-cons should be allowed to vote almost always devolves into a cynical discussion about which political party benefits from it.
Presumptive party registration and theoretical future ballots never should be a deciding factor in a debate over the basic rights within our political system. Then again, doing things the right way matters too.
If McAuliffe is being honest about his efforts here, he should be applauded. If not, then he's headed towards another showdown with the state Supreme Court and thousands of ex-felons in Virginia are caught in the middle of a cynical political game.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A long-time Clinton associate telling brazen, obvious lies? Inconceivable!
Please, no need to be so partisan.
Autopen or rubber stamp?
Yes, I'm deeply shocked that Republicans would support taking away the rights of the citizenry.
They are felons. If you want to vote, don't be a criminal.
State constitutions - who needs them?
If felons were predominantly republican the GOP would be trying to restore voting rights and the DNC would be sueing.
This is absolutely true
And the usual suspects will be along to tell us how principled their Team is.
Oh, wait...there it is...
"If McAuliffe is being honest about his efforts...."
Has Terry McAuliffe ever been honest about anything in his entire life?
Evaluate?
Why couldn't he just autopen the whole thing? Plenty of time left over for fundraising.
Terry worked enough wrist-action with donors et al in the Clinton years he can blast twenty thousand signatures a day no problem.
Much abstract. So euphemism.
Does this mean they can own guns now?
They can
Of course not. That provides zero benefit to the Democratic Party.
His original order actually made it easier for them to apply for the right to own guns but didn't restore them like voting rights.
Yes, which he lamented.
Voting is the more dangerous weapon.
IIRC from looking this up before, the governor can't restore a felon's gun rights, it takes a court order to do that.
The FBI got to him. He's under investigation.
After being told by the state Supreme Court that he did not have the authority to restore voting rights to all of Virginia's 200,000 ex-felons with a single stroke of his pen, McAuliffe says he's now going about the process one-by-one. On Monday in Richmond, McAuliffe announced that he'd already signed 13,000 individual orders to restore voting rights to former convicts, The Hill reports.
I dunno... how long does it take to look for "democrat" in the application?
I keed! I keed!
On the other hand, explain this voting rights thing-- how does the state determine if a voter isn't eligible at the time he shows up at the poll?
Is this relevant?
"[The governor of Virginia] shall communicate to the General Assembly, at each regular session, particulars of every case of fine or penalty remitted, of reprieve or pardon granted, and of punishment commuted, with his reasons for remitting, granting, or commuting the same."
If this applies to orders restoring voting rights, will the General Assembly be flooded with notifications explaining why each individual beneficiary ought to be able to vote?