Welcome to Session/Law Sound-off, our inaugural weekly current events quiz. Here we approach folks, from across the political spectrum, who pay close attention to the courts, the Capitol and cosmos, so they can tell us what they think about things.
We ask a rotating list of contributors three questions about things that matter, whether deadly serious or frivolously amusing. Their views are their own. But their sense of humor, where it shines through, we share in fully and frankly.
Query 1: A state Supreme Court appeal is pending on a recent MN Court of Appeals ruling, affirming a law that keeps felons from voting until they serve out their full probation terms. As one example, that means Jennifer Schroeder, who served less than a year on a 2013 Minnesota drug conviction, can’t vote until her 40-year probation ends. Where are you at on this issue?
Nick Zerwas, lobbyist, former GOP state representative: I was one of the few Republicans who co-authored the felon-voting bill. When I ran in my first city council race, there was a guy who I went to high school with and I talked to him for a half hour at his kitchen table. At the end of the conversation I said, “I'm glad I can count on your vote.” And he said, “I went to prison right out of high school for meth—I'm a convicted felon. I can’t vote for you.” For me, that was a turning point.
In Minnesota, what we need to do is either make continued progress to significantly curtail lengths of the probationary period, or allow people after they get out of prison to resume voting. We can't disenfranchise people for three or four decades while we expect them to live and contribute in society. That doesn't create a just society.
Melisa Lopez Franzen, attorney, DFL state senator: On Restore the Vote, I'm 100% behind it. My reaction to a 40-year probation is, it’s ridiculous. It doesn't even make any sense that someone will be deprived of voting for 40 years, after they’ve served their sentence. It was enough punishment for them to get out of jail, so why wouldn't that be enough to exercise their fundamental fight to vote?
Peter Bell, conservative writer, former Met Council chair: Extreme, bad examples make bad law, on the one hand. Someone who has 40 years of probation and they can't vote, that is offensive to most reasonable people. On the other hand, probation is given in lieu of prison and the court is giving someone a bit of a break. So I have mixed feelings. My final point is that, as a society, we are too restrictive with voting for convicted felons, so my instincts are to loosen that up to some degree. But whether we should go all the way and say, with any probation that you have you can vote, I'm not sure I would sign onto that. So I guess I'm in the mushy middle on that question.
Ron Latz, attorney, DFL state senator: I've promoted Restore the Vote for felons for many years, while I was chair of Judiciary and since. As a policy matter, I strongly believe that once felons are no longer in custody—once they're released from the prison portion of their sentence—they ought to be restored to their voting rights. They're back in the community, they’re paying taxes and they are participating in community activities. It promotes good citizenship, including positive reintegration into the community, and should thereby reduce recidivism. When people have a real stake in the community, they're less likely to commit crimes.
I haven’t read the court's decision itself. But as I recall that case, it’s a constitutional question. They probably just said the statute is not unconstitutional, so let the legislature figure it out. And we should.
[Editor’s note: He’s right. That is pretty much what the court said.]
John Lesch, attorney, former DFL state representative: We're way past the point where we should have been extending voting rights to felons. A lot of other states have done it. Minnesota's starting to fall behind the curve. We need to get on it.
Query 2: City workers on Thursday started clearing the memorial to George Floyd at 38th and Chicago in Minneapolis, though the big fist-shaped sculpture apparently will remain in the center of the intersection. Are you OK with what the city is doing here?
Zerwas: Well, I tend to be more of a law-and-order type. Whether it’s this scenario, or the homeless encampments or, heck, going all the way back to Occupy Wall Street, or even to cases where you had borderline occupations outside of the [Minneapolis] police precincts or the Hennepin County Courthouse—when government doesn’t swiftly nip these things in the bud before they can become entrenched, you make dealing with it so much harder when you finally do have to deal with it. That's what they're dealing with now. It's a political nightmare that [Mayor] Jacob Frey and the Minneapolis City Council and Police Department have created for themselves. And it's going to be unbelievably challenging to get out from under it.
Franzen: I personally know some friends who lived just a few blocks away from there who had to move because it has become an untenable situation for families. To this day, that is still public property. So we need to find a way to honor what happened in that space, without infringing upon those people who want to continue to live in that neighborhood in a safe manner. I think it has fundamentally changed the environment and we need to be cognizant about how to balance those interests.
Bell: I am. I think what happened to George Floyd was reprehensible. I think he was murdered. But I'm not sure that means he should be honored to the extent that many of the proponents of keeping that site a shrine to him want to do. I have trouble with that whole concept. I fully support the conviction of [former MPD Officer Derek] Chauvin and I think [Floyd] was murdered in a brutal fashion. I also think that police reform is legitimate. But a shrine to him is something that I have more difficulty with.
Latz: I would assume, without knowing, that the city did this with at least the knowledge of, or in consultation with, some of the community organizations. But ultimately, yes. I think there ought to be proper respect to the significance of the location as the site of George Floyd's death. But it's an important commercial intersection and corridor, and it ought to be restored to those blended purposes.
Lesch: The city has to walk a fine line, balancing the neighborhood’s safety, transportation and accessibility issues with the demands from folks that certain memorialization remains. I think that they've done what they needed to do. So I guess, I'd say yeah.
Query 3: The statewide mask mandate has been lifted for three weeks now, and the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis have finally followed suit. How confident are you running around with a naked face?
Zerwas: My wife and I both, unfortunately, had it [COVID-19] last winter and we got fully vaccinated this spring. We’re following the guidelines and we’re not masked when we go out any longer. I tend to be a rule follower. If the state tells me I have to wear it, I'll wear it. If it’s a private business, they can set their rules, so if the mandate is gone and businesses say they don't expect their patrons to wear it, I won't.
Franzen: I still wear my mask, so not 100%! When I go grocery shopping or go to public spaces that have limited ventilation, I still feel like I should continue to do that. And I have little kids who are wearing them—I make them wear masks in those spaces. So I want to be a good example for them.
Bell: I’m relatively comfortable with that. I think that the society needs to balance life and livelihood, and I think that this is an appropriate response. So I'm comfortable with eliminating that requirement.
Latz: Outdoors, I'm just fine. Indoors, I'm still pretty cautious, even though I'm fully vaccinated. In part, that’s because there are variants out there, or could be, that we don't know about. In part, it’s because a lot of young people are still not vaccinated and we don't want to become spreaders, even if we are otherwise protected. And, in part, it’s because I think it's a good example to set for people. I'll note that the Metro area is far more vaccinated than Greater Minnesota. And to the extent that people from Greater Minnesota are visiting the metro area, or going back and forth, there's still greater risk.
Lesch: I’m fine. I think that they took the appropriate amount of time to mandate the level of mask wearing that was needed. And I am starting to notice a lot more changes in the Metro that reflect what has been happening in Greater Minnesota for a while, actually. And the cases continue to go down. So I feel like the right decisions have been made.