AN ACT proposing an amendment to Section 25 of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to slavery and involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime.
Summary
HB319 is a proposed constitutional amendment to Section 25 of the Kentucky Constitution. The measure would remove the current exception that allows slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime, so that slavery and involuntary servitude would be prohibited in all circumstances. At the same time, the bill expressly preserves the ability of incarcerated people convicted of felonies to be employed while imprisoned, including work authorized under Section 253 of the Kentucky Constitution or otherwise provided by law.
The bill also sets out the ballot language and the procedural steps for placing the amendment before voters. It directs the Secretary of State to publish the full question and proposed amendment, and to certify the amendment to county clerks for inclusion on the ballot at the next regular election for members of the General Assembly, following the timing rules specified in the bill and existing election law.
Impact
If adopted by voters, HB319 would amend Kentucky’s Constitution by eliminating the “punishment for crime” exception in Section 25, thereby banning slavery and involuntary servitude outright. It would not eliminate prison labor; instead, it preserves the state’s authority to employ incarcerated felons under existing constitutional and statutory provisions. The bill primarily affects the constitutional text, election administration procedures, and the legal framework governing inmate work programs.
Sentiment
The available context shows no recorded committee discussion or vote history, so there is no direct evidence of partisan or stakeholder sentiment in the materials provided. Based on the bill’s subject matter, it appears to be framed as a civil-rights and constitutional reform measure aimed at removing an outdated exception from the state constitution while maintaining prison work programs.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the scope of the constitutional change: supporters would favor removing any constitutional allowance for involuntary servitude as punishment, while opponents or cautious observers may focus on whether the amendment could be read to disrupt prison labor or correctional operations. The bill addresses that concern directly by preserving prisoner employment, suggesting that the drafters anticipated debate over inmate work and sought to separate that issue from the prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude.