This post was originally published on this site.
Editor’s Note:
On the cusp of the most consequential election cycle of our time, public scholarship can help provide nuance, context, and clarity to a range of pressing issues. By centering policy questions and offering action-based strategies, this scholarship inspires us to make informed choices at the local, state, and national levels. We are pleased to present this series, “At Issue,” featuring publicly engaged scholars whose work highlights key issues of importance. From efforts to reframe discussions about justice and inclusion, to the impact of public debates surrounding immigration and race, the series concludes with a prescription for how we move beyond the election to analyze, organize, and strategize on mutual priorities. The series challenges us to consider how key policy issues within this election may impact the future of higher education and beyond.
-Dr. Khalilah L. Brown-Dean, Series Editor
—
Dr. Khalilah L. Brown-Dean is the Rob Rosenthal Distinguished Professor of Civic Engagement and Executive Director of the Allbritton Center for the Study of Public Life at Wesleyan University. A scholar of voting rights, punishment, and civic engagement, she is author of the book “Identity Politics in the United States” and hosts the Gracie Award-winning radio show and podcast, “DISRUPTED.”Â
Reframing the Record: Why Democrats Should Rethink the “Prosecutor vs. Felon” Faming in the 2024 Presidential Campaign
By Philippe E. C. Andal
As a community-based researcher and organizer invested in criminal justice reform, I am deeply concerned about the narratives that have emerged around the leading candidates. With the nomination of a former prosecutor and a person with a felony record, campaign messaging has settled into the familiar, yet damaging, binary of “prosecutor vs. felon.” While this may seem like an advantageous angle, it ultimately undermines the possibility of building an inclusive multi-racial democracy.Â
In my work advocating for the expungement of criminal records, I have witnessed firsthand the social, psychological, and economic impact of being branded a felon. Because our current criminal justice system values retribution over rehabilitation, those who possess criminal records suffer a host of collateral consequences even upon release from incarceration. This experience of second-class citizenship often comes with dehumanizing identities, like “felon” or “convict,” that increases the likelihood of recidivism and feeds cycles of generational poverty and community trauma. Avenues for legal relief from criminal records, like expungements, offer people the profound opportunity to remove the dehumanizing labels and rewrite the record of their lives to move toward fully claiming the promises of American democracy, “liberty and justice for all.”
As the impact of this election will endure long past November, it is critically important to scrutinize the narratives we use during this campaign. Rather than utilizing language that perpetuates negative stereotypes about persons with records, the party should reframe their messaging to directly address the barriers for a more equitable nation.
Reframing Voter Engagement
As of this writing, neither candidate is beyond the margin of error to declare a comfortable lead in polling, which means both campaigns need to advance stronger messaging with election day less than 40 days away. Instead of doubling down on the “prosecutor vs. felon” narrative, Democrats should take advantage of this moment to rewrite its messaging beyond these portrayed flat identities. While emphasizing qualifications (and disqualifications) for public office are legitimate and necessary aims, how they are communicated matter. Even the criminal justice chapter of the Associated Press Stylebook was updated in May discouraging journalists from using words like “prisoner,” “inmate,” “convict,” and “felon,” to instead use person-first language, noting the problematic and racialized connotations of those terms and their dehumanizing effects. Should Democrats continue to use their “prosecutor vs. felon” language, they risk alienating undecided and independent voters, as well as the one-third of the American population who has some form a criminal record.
Reframing Accountability
Ironically, despite being a resident of Florida, a state notorious for its strict disenfranchisement policies, former President Trump with a felony conviction remains eligible to vote in this election, despite popular quips from Democratic rallies suggesting otherwise. The reality is former President Trump has not suffered the long-documented consequences and barriers of those with criminal records, such as employment eligibility and access to housing. As the nation continues to reckon with the complicated and complex system of mass incarceration, the “prosecutor vs. felon” framing belittles the disparities that decades of tough-on-crime policies have yielded. It also undermines the possibility of correcting historic and present injustices, especially those disproportionately felt by communities of color. Instead of depending on the status quo of criminal identity, Democrats should seize this moment to address the stark differences of justice experienced by former President Trump and the 77 million Americans with a criminal record.
Reframing Opportunity
During the Democratic National Convention, Vice President Harris committed to creating what she called an “opportunity economy” to bring together people and businesses from all sectors of the American economy to create jobs. Undergirding her vision is the proposition that fair and living wages for the lowest of workers does not have to be sacrificed for a thriving economy.  This same kind of “both/and” thinking should inform all aspects of the campaign’s policy proposals and messaging. Rather than relying on an “us vs. them” trope that not only entrenches partisanship but continues to paint all people with records in one broad stroke, the party could better leverage this moment to highlight how the privileges of race and class make the former president immune to the barriers to economic housing, education, safety, economic mobility, and even voting faced by average Americans.
While Vice President Harris’ prosecutorial record and former President Trump’s felony record have energized both of their bases, neither campaign has gained a decisive lead through this messaging. Democrats would do well to recognize this problem and move away from this framing on grounds of both efficacy and ethics. Just as one mistake should not define a person for life, former President Trump’s felony record should not define the terms of political discourse in an election affecting millions. By rejecting the same tropes that have caused millions to abandon hope in the American dream, Democrats can instead rewrite the record to embrace a vision of opportunity addressing issues such as income inequality, healthcare access, climate change, and even criminal justice reform. This shift will better position the party to resonate with a broader and more diverse electorate, especially Black men and men of color, who have disproportionately been affected by law enforcement and the criminal justice system.
This is not about diminishing the serious nature of the criminal acts committed by the former president or undermining the first nomination of a qualified woman of color by a major party. Rather, reframing the record helps elevate the people by whom and for whom the office of the President exists. By reifying the “prosecutor” and “felon” binary, justice system-involved people suffer. In turn, our democracy suffers. It’s time to reframe the record by leading with a vision of progress, justice, and inclusivity.
Dr. Philippe E. C. Andal is a community-based researcher, organizer, and minister. He serves as Co-Chair of Congregations Organized for a New Connecticut which organizes 30,000+ people of faith around issues of criminal justice, healthcare, and education reform.Â