A rural Missouri election clerk’s plan to take away the voting rights of residents who have been appointed a court guardian has caught the attention of Missouri’s last Democratic governor.
Former Gov. Jay Nixon, now a partner at St. Louis law firm Dowd Bennett, is representing the family of Mark Murphey — a 35-year-old man with a cognitive condition that causes seizures. His ability to vote was threatened by the elections clerk of Phelps County.
Even though the clerk has indicated she changed her mind and will allow Murphey to vote, Nixon and others worry about the precedent set by her threat. Nixon said he is drafting a legal opinion that will make clear that Murphey — and other Missouri residents under court guardianships — maintain the right to vote.
“This is a problem that just needs to be nipped in the bud right here so that other families and other folks don’t have to suffer under the stress that the Murpheys had to,” Nixon told The Star.
“And, plus, it preserves the proper right to hear the voices of all Americans that are capable of that at election time.”
Pamela Grow, the Republican clerk of Phelps County in central Missouri, told the Phelps County Commission late last month she would remove the voter registrations of all people under court guardianships — even if a court has expressly said a person has the ability to vote.
Grow’s comments, which indicated she planned to challenge court rulings that preserved residents’ rights to vote, were viewed by many as a plan to disenfranchise voters with disabilities. The Star, citing legal experts, reported last week that her plans would have violated state and federal voting laws.
But Grow apparently reversed her decision later in the week. After nearly an hour of public comments from people who worried someone they knew would lose their right to vote, Grow told the Phelps County Commission that her office would not remove people under court guardianships from the voter rolls, according to a report in the Phelps County Focus.
Grow did not respond to two emails and a call from The Star asking her to explain why she changed her mind.
In a brief statement to The Star on Wednesday, Phelps County Public Administrator Dana Scooter said she heard Grow said she was dropping her plans.
“I am hoping she did,” Scooter said.
Mark Murphey’s parents, John and Ann, are pleased with Grow’s reversal and called her plan “blatantly unconstitutional and wrong” in an email to The Star.
“Our family continues to be overwhelmed by the outpouring of support we received from throughout the Rolla community and across the state,” the email said. “We’ve been deeply moved by all of those who have reached out to us to offer help and contacted Mrs. Grow to oppose her unconstitutional voter suppression. We extend our heartfelt thanks to everyone who worked to right this wrong, including many people we will never know.”
Mark Murphey, who was born with a build-up of fluid in his brain called hydrocephalus, works at Phelps County Industrial Solutions in Rolla and is actively involved in voting and watching the news. The stress of nearly losing his right to vote caused him to have a panic attack last week, John Murphey said in a phone interview.
Grow’s plan illustrated what she called a conflict between the Missouri Constitution and state law that created confusion about whether people under court guardianships had a right to vote. Voting rights advocates acknowledged this disparity to The Star last week and said legislative or legal action could prevent election officials from removing eligible voters from registration lists because of a court-appointed guardianship.
Missouri law defines an incapacitated person as someone who, because of a physical or mental condition, is unable to “receive and evaluate information or to communicate decisions to such an extent that he or she lacks capacity to meet essential requirements for food, clothing, shelter, safety or other care such that serious physical injury, illness, or disease is likely to occur.”
The state’s probate code allows judges to issue orders that preserve an otherwise incapacitated person’s right to vote and their abilities to drive a vehicle or get married.
But the state constitution is more broad.
It says: “No person who has a guardian of his or her estate or person by reason of mental incapacity, appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction and no person who is involuntarily confined in a mental institution pursuant to an adjudication of a court of competent jurisdiction shall be entitled to vote.”
But Nixon doesn’t believe there’s a discrepancy at all, he said in a phone interview.
A federal appeals court in 2007 found that although the Missouri Constitution bans voting by people deemed “incapacitated,” the ban could not be applied across the board because probate court judges can issue orders that preserve the rights of some voters. Nixon was the Missouri attorney general when the order was issued.
Although Murphey was appointed a court guardian because of his disability, a probate judge in a court order specifically preserved his right to vote and marry.
“I think the law here is clear. I think it’s powerful. I think it’s on point,” Nixon said. “And I think that the opinion that we draft will be clear and strong and applicable to situations like this and others that are similarly situated.”
John Murphey said he is prepared to take legal action against Grow to make sure his son maintains his right to vote.
“The suppression of voting rights is a scary thing,” he said. “We see it happening all over the country. But when it’s you that they’re affecting, it’s more than scary. It’s terrifying. You know, that my son could have lost his constitutional right to vote because of this.”
While Grow, who oversees all local elections in Phelps County, did not return a call for comment for this story, her voicemail machine left a stark partisan message to callers:
“Remember that when you vote, you have a choice to make between bigger government and smaller liberty or more liberty and smaller government. The choice is yours. Choose wisely.”
