by Aadam Barclay, Voting Rights Project Legal Intern — Summer 2025
Most Americans in jail maintain the right to vote, but only a fraction of those eligible actually cast a ballot. Even in states that have expanded access, voter turnout in jails has not increased in kind.
All but two states and Washington, D.C. disenfranchise those serving prison sentences for felony convictions, but most individuals awaiting trial in jails or serving time for misdemeanors have not lost the right to vote. However, whether they can effectively exercise that right and access the ballot is another matter. With a few exceptions, individuals in jail vote by absentee ballot rather than in-person. Fourteen states still require voters to provide an excuse to vote absentee, and of those states, eight do not consider incarceration a valid reason. Denied practical opportunities to vote, many individuals in jail are effectively disenfranchised despite possessing the legal right to vote.
Numerous logistical barriers impede jail voting. Absentee ballot application deadlines vary: some states accept applications within a day of an election, while others require applications to be submitted weeks in advance. If someone makes a procedural mistake while casting a mail ballot, they may not have the opportunity to “cure” the error before their vote is discarded. A person detained after the absentee ballot application deadline may have no means of voting at all.
Individual jail operations also affect voting access. Ensuring that individuals can register and apply likely requires continuous outreach efforts, especially given that jail populations can turn over rapidly—an acute challenge if a jail already lacks adequate staffing to carry out basic functions, let alone to distribute voting materials.
In Philadelphia, where I attend law school, I have visited a local jail with the Decarceration Advocacy Project, a student pro bono organization that provides incarcerated individuals with informational resources. These resources include handouts addressing common questions about topics such as the steps of a trial or how to access healthcare resources while incarcerated. The most common request from individuals held in jail with whom I have spoken is for docket sheets, containing the civil or criminal charges against them as well as scheduled court dates. Since incarcerated individuals lack regular access to the internet, they must rely on outside assistance even to acquire timely information about their own cases.
This means that information about voting and elections is often difficult or impossible to access for individuals in jail. Particularly in state and local elections, which receive less media attention than national elections, voters may rely on informational guides to learn about the candidates and issues on the ballot. Not every jurisdiction offers a voter guide, however. Those jurisdictions that do offer physical guides may not distribute them to jails, and others, such as Philadelphia, rely on a web-based digital guide that is likely inaccessible to incarcerated individuals. Lack of access to voter guides for local elections is especially unfair to those in jail, since local ballot contests often include the district attorney or equivalent prosecutor, offices that can assert significant influence over policing and jails.
Difficulty accessing information also affects voter turnout in jails, as incarcerated individuals may be unaware of their own eligibility to vote. Pennsylvania permitted no-excuse absentee voting beginning in 2019, for example, but statewide voter turnout in jails remains low, in part because individuals may not be aware of their current rights.
One state has shown a potentially fruitful path towards universal participation in jail voting. Last year, Colorado passed a law requiring counties to facilitate jail voting, including informing individuals of their eligibility and conducting at least one day of in-person voting. Although some municipalities in various states had previously offered in-person jail voting voluntarily, this was the first statewide mandate in the nation. The result was a massive increase in jail voting last November—more than 2300 incarcerated individuals voted compared to only 380 in 2020.
States and localities should look to Colorado’s example to ensure that procedural and logistical barriers do not deprive vulnerable and isolated individuals from exercising their right to participate in decisions that bear directly on their liberty and safety.