SB 2918 is a private suffrage bill that restores the right to vote to Teddy Cleveland Null of Alcorn County, Mississippi. The bill recites his prior felony convictions from 1995, 2002, and 2016, along with the sentences and dates of release/discharge, and states that the Legislature has been informed he has since lived as a law-abiding and honorable citizen. If enacted, the bill would fully restore his suffrage rights effective upon passage.
The measure does not change Mississippi’s general election or criminal laws for the public at large; instead, it operates as a person-specific restoration of voting rights for one individual who was previously disqualified as an elector because of felony convictions. Its legal effect is limited to removing that disqualification for Teddy Null and allowing him to register and vote again under state law.
Impact
SB 2918 amends no general statute and creates no broad policy change; it is a special act restoring suffrage to a named individual. The bill affects Mississippi election law only as applied to Teddy Cleveland Null by lifting the constitutional/statutory disenfranchisement tied to his felony convictions. Its practical impact is to restore his eligibility as an elector immediately upon enactment, while leaving the state’s existing rules on felony disenfranchisement otherwise unchanged.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal opposition or support is documented. The bill text itself uses favorable language, emphasizing that Null has since behaved as a law-abiding and honorable citizen, which suggests a sympathetic rationale for restoration. Overall, the available record indicates a routine, individualized suffrage restoration measure rather than a contested policy proposal.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the use of a private bill to restore voting rights to a single person with multiple prior convictions, including property, vehicle, burglary-related, conspiracy, and false statement offenses. Supporters would likely focus on rehabilitation and the Legislature’s finding that he has been law-abiding since discharge, while critics of private suffrage bills may object to individualized relief or question whether the convictions warrant restoration. No specific objections are recorded in the provided transcripts or votes.