Nearly 157 years after the 13th Amendment was ratified to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, five states will ask voters to decide on measures banning slavery — in the form of prison labor.
Advocates who petitioned to add such questions to the ballots in Alabama
, Oregon
, Louisiana
, Tennessee
, and Vermont hope to remove provisions in state constitutions that provide for slavery or involuntary work in the criminal justice system. The practical upshot would be to make prison labor voluntary.
Although the 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865, the exception clause in the Constitution allowed authorities in the 19th century, primarily in the South, to implement laws such as the Black Codes that permitted the incarceration of black people for small crimes and forced them into labor. Such laws were considered as the buildup to Jim Crow laws that became outlawed by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, according to Pew Research Center.
None of the proposals in these five states would create immediate changes inside state prisons. However, they could lead to legal challenges concerning limits on how such institutions can utilize prison labor.
Around 20 states have constitutions containing explicit language permitting slavery and involuntary servitude as criminal punishments. Colorado became the first state in 2018 to start the trend of ballot initiatives seeking to remove language from the state constitution allowing for prison labor. Two years later, Utah and Nebraska approved similar ballot initiatives.
Here is what each state with ballot initiatives involving slavery and indentured servitude language will be voting on this November:
Tennessee
The ballot measure in Tennessee seeks to remove language that provides for slavery and involuntary servitude as criminal punishments and replace it with the statement “Slavery and involuntary servitude are forever prohibited.”
“We understand that those who are incarcerated cannot be forced to work without pay, but we should not create a situation where they won’t be able to work at all,” state Sen. Raumesh Akbari (D) told the Associated Press.
Alabama
The Yellowhammer State will be voting on whether to ratify its state constitution to remove all “racist terminology” and replace a section on convict labor, which is similar to what presently exists in Tennessee’s state constitution, according to state House Speaker Mac McCutcheon (R), one of the proponents of the measure.
“For several years, we’ve been working on cleaning up the Constitution and the wording in it, and this will move us forward with helping to accomplish that. There is some racist terminology in there and this is going to address some of that,” McCutcheon told the Associated Press in February.
Oregon
Voters in the Beaver State are asked whether to repeal its exception clause and whether to add language allowing a court or parole agency to order alternatives to incarceration as part of a criminal sentencing.
There is not an official “vote no” campaign over the measure, but the Oregon State Sheriffs’ Association opposes the proposal over concerns that it will result in unintended consequences. The group clarified that they do not condone or support slavery, according to a statement sent to Oregon Public Broadcasting.
“Participation by [adults in custody] in these programs is voluntary, but the way this measure is written any involvement in a Jail program by an [adult in custody] without an order from a court, probation officer or parole officer would likely be seen as involuntary servitude,” the OSSA wrote in a letter to the Oregon Secretary of State’s Office.
Louisiana
The Bayou State’s language in its constitution presently holds that “slavery and involuntary servitude are prohibited, except in the latter case as punishment for a crime.” The ballot amendment would alter the language to say, “Slavery and involuntary servitude are prohibited, (but this) does not apply to the otherwise lawful administration of criminal justice.”
Notably, the proposed amendment in Louisiana has been subject to heightened criticism in recent months even by one of its original sponsors, state Rep. Edmond Jordan (D), who told the The Times-Picayune/The New Orleans Advocate earlier this month that voters should actually reject the measure.
Jordan argues the way the ballot measure was written created “confusion” and now contends it could be used to permit forms of slavery again, a position also held by the nonprofit Council for a Better Louisiana.
“This amendment is an example of why it is so important to get the language right when presenting constitutional amendments to voters,” the nonprofit group wrote in a statement calling on voters to choose “no” and for lawmakers to use Tennessee’s ballot language as an example to borrow from.
Vermont
Perhaps one of the most confusing ballot amendment questions is in Vermont, which was the first state to ban slavery in 1777. The state’s ballot proposal does not involve prison labor, but it repeals language saying persons could be held as servants, slaves, or apprentices with their consent or “for the payments of debts, damages, fines, costs, or the like” and adds language strictly forbidding slavery and indentured servitude of all forms.
“I think that’s what also makes the question on the ballot such a contradiction, if you will, and perhaps invokes cognitive dissonance with folks here in the state because for generations here in Vermont, folks have learned that the state was the first to abolish slavery,” the Rev. Mark Hughes of Burlington, Vermont, told the Washington Examiner.
Hughes is executive director of Abolish Slavery Vermont and Justice for All Vermont, a pair of groups that seek to end “systemic racism” in the state.
