Philosophy and Public Affairs 47 (4):378-411 (2019)

Annette Zimmermann
Princeton University
Disagreement persists about when, if at all, disenfranchisement is a fitting response to criminal wrongdoing of type X. Positive retributivists endorse a permissive view of fittingness: on this view, disenfranchising a remarkably wide range of morally serious criminal wrongdoers is justified. But defining fittingness in the context of criminal disenfranchisement in such broad terms is implausible, since many crimes sanctioned via disenfranchisement have little to do with democratic participation in the first place: the link between the nature of a criminal act X (the ‘desert basis’) and a fitting sanction Y is insufficiently direct in such cases. I define a new, much narrower account of the kind of criminal wrongdoing which is a more plausible desert basis for disenfranchisement: ‘political wrongdoing’, such as electioneering, corruption, or conspiracy with foreign powers. I conclude that widespread blanket and post-incarceration disenfranchisement policies are overinclusive, because they disenfranchise persons guilty of serious, but non-political, criminal wrongdoing. While such overinclusiveness is objectionable in any context, it is particularly objectionable in circumstances in which it has additional large-scale collateral consequences, for instance by perpetuating existing structures of racial injustice. At the same time, current policies are underinclusive, thus hindering the aim of holding political wrongdoers accountable.
Keywords political philosophy  philosophy of law  ethics  disenfranchisement  corruption  democracy  philosophy of criminal law  participation rights  electioneering  bribery  foreign interference
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2019, 2019, Early View
DOI 10.1111/papa.12153
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 61,064
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Limits of Criminal Disenfranchisement.Nicholas Munn - 2011 - Criminal Justice Ethics 30 (3):223-239.
Penal Disenfranchisement.Christopher Bennett - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (3):411-425.
The Disenfranchisement of Felons.L. R. - 2001 - Law and Philosophy 20 (6):553-580.
Penal Disenfranchisement and Equality of Status.Costanza Porro - 2019 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 38 (3):401-414.
Felon Disenfranchisement and Democratic Legitimacy.Matt S. Whitt - 2017 - Social Theory and Practice 43 (2):283-311.
The Nature and Significance of Culpability.David O. Brink - 2019 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 13 (2):347-373.
The Revolution and the Criminal Law.Adil Ahmad Haque - 2013 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (2):231-253.
The Disenfranchisement of Felons.Richard L. Lippke - 2001 - Law and Philosophy 20 (6):553 - 580.


Added to PP index

Total views
22 ( #484,589 of 2,439,693 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #95,932 of 2,439,693 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes