Governing the restoration of civil rights for ex-felons: an evaluation of the Executive Clemency Board in Florida Bryan Lee Miller a * and Joseph F. Spillane b a Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia Southern University, PO Box 8105, Statesboro, GA 30460-8105, USA; b Department of History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA (Received 10 November 2011; final version received 8 August 2012) In Florida, when someone is adjudicated guilty of a felony crime, they lose the right to vote. The only way to regain these rights is to go through the process of rights restoration. The civil rights restoration hearings in Florida have the potential to serve as a formal ceremony in which individuals are acknowledged for their recovery from crime and readmitted into the political community. Data from the Governor ’ s office, observations of the Executive Clemency Board, and interviews with ex-offenders who have experience with the restoration process, were evaluated to determine the impact these hearings have for ex-offenders’ reintegration. Results suggest that the low success rate, cumbersome process, and lengthy amount of time required may all serve to further alienate the many applicants who are rejected, impeding their reintegration into the community. Recommendations to either simplify the process of rights restoration or to remove ex-felon disenfranchisement policies are given. Keywords: ex-felons; disenfranchisement; reintegration; rights restoration; voting; clemency Introduction Florida governor, Jeb Bush, stated that the restoration of civil rights is, ‘an exhaust- ing, emotionally draining process that can also be uplifting when people have chan- ged their lives and turned things around’ (Pfankuch, 2001). In Florida, those convicted of a felony offense must go through the rights restoration process in order to vote, run for an elected office, or serve on a jury. The rights restoration process serves as one of the final steps in the process of restoring liberties forfeited by a criminal conviction. Maruna (2011) argues that unlike the punishment process that involves well- orchestrated and elaborate proceedings, the reintegration process involves very few of these types of events. Ceremonies or formal moments recognizing ex-offender reintegration have been noted as important events that can symbolize the process of moving toward full civic membership. Scholars have noted the potential benefits of these types of ceremonies. Trice and Roman (1970) argue that delabeling, or deviant decertification ceremonies signify an important point in which an offender *Corresponding author. Email: bryanmiller@georgiasouthern.edu Contemporary Justice Review 2012, 1–22, iFirst Article ISSN 1028-2580 print/ISSN 1477-2248 online Ó 2012 Taylor & Francis http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2012.734568 http://www.tandfonline.com