American University
Browse

Voters approve measures to ban slavery in four states

Download (63.05 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2023-07-27, 17:27 authored by Viyon Houessou-Adin

On November 8, 2022, the midterm elections were held and there were ballot measures up for vote on the state level. In five states—Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, and Louisiana—voters were asked to decide whether to repeal language from their state constitutions that allow slavery and involuntary servitude as a punishment for crimes.[1] The language in these state constitutions largely resemble that of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which says, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”[2]

In Alabama, the measure amends the state constitution to include a provision that states, “No form of slavery shall exist in this state; and there shall not be any involuntary servitude.” In Oregon, the measure “removes all language [in the state constitution] creating an exception and makes the prohibition against slavery and involuntary servitude unequivocal.” In Tennessee, the measure inserts language saying, “slavery and indentured servitude shall be forever prohibited.” In Vermont, the measure removes exceptions and adds a provision that states, “slavery and indentured servitude in any form are prohibited.”[3]

The ballot measure was only rejected in one state: Louisiana. State Representative Edmond Jordan, who initially sponsored the measure, urged voters to turn it down because he believed it contained ambiguous language that could inadvertently expand slavery.[4] A new measure will be introduced when lawmakers can produce language that clearly prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude.

These ballot measures could serve as a model for repealing the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution on the federal level and their impact on individuals being held in state prisons may be life changing.

History

Publisher

American University (Washington, D.C.); Juris Mentem Law Review

Notes

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Juris Mentem Law Review. This article has been accepted for inclusion in the Juris Mentem Digital Collection. The Digital Collection is edited by Juris Mentem Staff but is not peer-reviewed by university faculty. For more information, visit: https://www.american.edu/spa/jlc/juris-mentem.cfm Questions can be directed to jurismentem@american.edu

Journal

Juris Mentem Law Review

Usage metrics

    Juris Mentem Law Review

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC