The Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Monday in a closely-watched case challenging the state’s new law that restored voting rights for felons on probation or supervised release.

Voting Rights Restored for 55,000 Ex-Felons

Passed by the state legislature last year, the law allowed around 55,000 Minnesotans who had been stripped of their voting rights after felony convictions to regain their eligibility to vote while still serving probation or supervised release sentences.

Previously, those convicted of felonies in Minnesota could not vote until they had completed all terms of their sentence, including probation periods that can sometimes last decades.

Legal Standing at Issue

A key issue before the Supreme Court is whether the plaintiff group, the Minnesota Voters Alliance, has legal standing to challenge the law’s constitutionality.

The Alliance, joined by three Republican-affiliated voters, is appealing a lower court ruling that found they lacked standing as taxpayers to bring the suit.

An Anoka County judge said their broad interpretation of taxpayer standing would allow virtually any law to be challenged.

At Monday’s hearing, the Alliance’s attorney James Dickey argued taxpayer standing should be viewed more expansively under prior case law. But the state argued the group must show specific unlawful expenditures to have standing.

Constitutional Debate Over “Civil Rights”

On the merits, the Alliance contends the law violates the state constitution’s ban on felon voting unless their “civil rights” are restored.

They argue this requires full restoration of all civil rights lost due to a felony conviction, not just voting rights.

State attorneys countered that the constitution does not specify “all civil rights” must be restored, giving the legislature discretion.

Some justices questioned whether they could rule on constitutionality if they determine the plaintiffs lack standing.

Disproportionate Impact on Minorities Cited

Advocates for the law say disenfranchising felons after release has a disproportionate impact on minority communities.

They argue allowing those who remain law-abiding to vote while on probation aids reintegration into society.

Courts Previously Split on Challenges

The Minnesota Court of Appeals previously rejected a separate challenge to the law on similar grounds.

Twenty-two other states automatically restore voting rights for felons upon release from incarceration, regardless of probation status.

The high court’s ruling, expected in the coming months, will ultimately decide the legality of Minnesota’s approach and its impact on tens of thousands of voters convicted of felonies. State officials urged a ruling by late June to provide clarity before the next election.