document_title: Voting rights in the United States

question_text: who has the power to set voting requirements

question_tokens: who has the power to set voting requirements

text: Voting rights in the United States

text: Background[edit]

text: The United States Constitution did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible. In the early history of the U.S., most states allowed only white male adult property owners to vote.[1][2][3] Freed slaves could vote in four states.[4] Men without property and women were largely prohibited from voting. Women could vote in New Jersey until 1807 (provided they could meet the property requirement) and in some local jurisdictions in other northern states. Non-white Americans could also vote in these jurisdictions, provided they could meet the property requirement. By 1856, white men were allowed to vote in all states regardless of property ownership, although requirements for paying tax remained in five states.[5][6] On the other hand several states, including Pennsylvania and New Jersey stripped the free black males of the right to vote in the same period.

text: Four of the fifteen post-Civil War constitutional amendments were ratified to extend voting rights to different groups of citizens. These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:

text:
"Race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (15th Amendment, 1870)
"On account of sex" (19th Amendment, 1920)
"By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" for federal elections (24th Amendment, 1964)[nb 1]
"Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age" (26th Amendment, 1971)

tag: ul

text: Following the Reconstruction Era until the culmination of the Civil Rights Movement, Jim Crow laws such as literacy tests, poll taxes, and religious tests were some of the state and local laws used in various parts of the United States to deny immigrants (including legal ones and newly naturalized citizens), non-white citizens, Native Americans, and any other locally "undesirable" groups from exercising voting rights granted under the constitution.[7] Because of such state and local discriminatory practices, over time, the federal role in elections has increased, through amendments to the Constitution and enacted legislation (e.g., the Voting Rights Act of 1965).

text: The "right to vote" is not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution except in the above referenced amendments, and only in reference to the fact that the franchise cannot be denied or abridged based solely on the aforementioned qualifications. In other words, the "right to vote" is perhaps better understood, in layman's terms, as only prohibiting certain forms of legal discrimination in establishing qualifications for suffrage. States may deny the "right to vote" for other reasons. For example, many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote. More controversial restrictions include those laws that prohibit convicted felons from voting, even those who have served their sentences. Another example, seen in Bush v. Gore, are disputes as to what rules should apply in counting or recounting ballots.[8]

text: A state may choose to fill an office by means other than an election. For example, upon death or resignation of a legislator, the state may allow the affiliated political party to choose a replacement to hold office until the next scheduled election. Such an appointment is often affirmed by the governor.[9]

text: The Constitution, in Article VI, clause (paragraph) 3, states that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States". However, as described in the sections below, voting rights reforms in the 19th and 20th centuries extended the franchise to non-whites, those who do not own property, women, and those 18–21 years old.

text: Milestones of national franchise changes[edit]

text:
1789: The Constitution grants the states the power to set voting requirements. Generally, states limited this right to property-owning or tax-paying white males.
1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 allows white men born outside of the United States to become citizens with the right to vote.
1792: Beginning of the abolition of property qualifications for white men, from 1792 (Kentucky) to 1856 (North Carolina) during the periods of Jeffersonian and Jacksonian democracy.[5]
1792-1838: Free black males lose the right to vote in several Northern states including Pennsylvania and New Jersey
1868: Citizenship is guaranteed to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, setting the stage for future expansions to voting rights.
1870: Non-white men and freed male slaves are guaranteed the right to vote by the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, for many years, some states were very successful at suppressing this vote (see Jim Crow Laws).
1887: Citizenship is granted to Native Americans who are willing to disassociate themselves from their tribe by the Dawes Act, making the men technically eligible to vote.
1913: Direct election of Senators, established by the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, gave voters rather than state legislatures the right to elect senators.[10]
1920: Women are guaranteed the right to vote by the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In practice, the same restrictions that hindered the ability of non-white men to vote now also applied to non-white women.
1924: All Native Americans are granted citizenship and the right to vote, regardless of tribal affiliation. By this point, approximately two thirds of Native Americans were already citizens.[11][12]
1943: Chinese immigrants given the right to citizenship and the right to vote by the Magnuson Act.
1961: Residents of Washington, D.C. are granted the right to vote in U.S. Presidential Elections by the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution.
1964: Tax payment prohibited from being used as a condition for voting in federal elections by the Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
1965: Protection of voter registration and voting for racial minorities, later applied to language minorities, is established by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This has also been applied to correcting discriminatory election systems and districting.[13]
1966: Tax payment and property requirements for voting are prohibited in all U.S. elections by the Supreme Court in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections.
1971: Adults aged 18 through 21 are granted the right to vote by the Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This was enacted in response to Vietnam War protests, which argued that soldiers who were old enough to fight for their country should be granted the right to vote.[10][14]
1986: United States Military and Uniformed Services, Merchant Marine, other citizens overseas, living on bases in the United States, abroad, or aboard ship are granted the right to vote by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.[15]

text: Removal of exclusions[edit]

text: Each extension of voting rights has been a product of, and also brought about, social change. Extension of voting rights happened through movements and a need for the US to adapt to its growing population.

text: Native American people[edit]

text: From 1778 to 1871, the government tried to resolve its relationship with the various native tribes by negotiating treaties. These treaties formed agreements between two sovereign nations, stating that Native American people were citizens of their tribe, living within the boundaries of the United States. The treaties were negotiated by the executive branch and ratified by the U.S. Senate. It said that native tribes would give up their rights to hunt and live on huge parcels of land that they had inhabited in exchange for trade goods, yearly cash annuity payments, and assurances that no further demands would be made on them. Most often, part of the land would be "reserved" exclusively for the tribe's use.[16]

text: Throughout the 1800s, many native tribes gradually lost claim to the lands they had inhabited for centuries through the federal government's Indian Removal policy to relocate tribes from the Southeast and Northwest to west of the Mississippi River. European-American settlers continued to encroach on western lands. Only in 1879, in the Standing Bear trial, were American Indians recognized as persons in the eyes of the United States government. Judge Elmer Scipio Dundy of Nebraska declared that Indians were people within the meaning of the laws, and they had the rights associated with a writ of habeas corpus. However, Judge Dundy left unsettled the question as to whether Native Americans were guaranteed US citizenship.[17]

text: Although Native Americans were born within the national boundaries of the United States, those on reservations were considered citizens of their own tribes, rather than of the United States. They were denied the right to vote because they were not considered citizens by law and were thus ineligible. Many Native Americans were told that they would become citizens if they gave up their tribal affiliations in 1887 under the Dawes Act, which allocated communal lands to individual households and was intended to aid in the assimilation of Native Americans into majority culture. This still did not guarantee their right to vote. In 1924 the remaining Native Americans, estimated at about one-third, became United States citizens. But, many western states continued to restrict Native American ability to vote through property requirements, economic pressures, hiding the polls, and condoning of physical violence against those who voted.[18] Since the late 20th century, they have been protected under provisions of the Voting Rights Act as a racial minority, and in some areas, language minority, gaining election materials in their native languages.

text: Religious test[edit]

text: In several British North American colonies, before and after the 1776 Declaration of Independence, Jews, Quakers and/or Catholics were excluded from the franchise and/or from running for elections.[19]

text: The Delaware Constitution of 1776 stated that "Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust, before taking his seat, or entering upon the execution of his office, shall (...) also make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: I, A B. do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration.".[20] This was repealed by Article I, Section II. of the 1792 Constitution: "No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, under this State".[21] The 1778 Constitution of the State of South Carolina stated, "No person shall be eligible to sit in the house of representatives unless he be of the Protestant religion",[22] the 1777 Constitution of the State of Georgia (art. VI) that "The representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county (...) and they shall be of the Protestant religion".[23]

text: With the growth in the number of Baptists in Virginia before the Revolution, who challenged the established Anglican Church, the issues of religious freedom became important to rising leaders such as James Madison. As a young lawyer, he defended Baptist preachers who were not licensed by (and were opposed by) the established state Anglican Church. He carried developing ideas about religious freedom to be incorporated into the constitutional convention of the United States.

text: In 1787, Article One of the United States Constitution stated that "the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature". More significantly, Article Six disavowed the religious test requirements of several states, saying: "[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

text: But, in Maryland, Jewish Americans were excluded from State office until the law requiring candidates to affirm a belief in an afterlife[24] was repealed in 1828.

text: Poor whites and free African Americans[edit]

text: At the time of ratification of the Constitution in the late 18th century, most states had property qualifications which restricted the franchise; the exact amount varied by state, but by some estimates, more than half of white men were disenfranchised.[25] Several states granted suffrage to free men of color after the Revolution, including North Carolina. This fact was noted by Justice Benjamin Robbins Curtis' dissent in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), as he emphasized that blacks had been considered citizens at the time the Constitution was ratified:

text: Of this there can be no doubt. At the time of the ratification of the Articles of Confederation, all free native-born inhabitants of the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina, though descended from African slaves, were not only citizens of those States, but such of them as had the other necessary qualifications possessed the franchise of electors, on equal terms with other citizens.[26]

text:
In the 1820s, New York State enlarged its franchise to white men by dropping the property qualification, but maintained it for free blacks.
The Supreme Court of North Carolina had upheld the ability of free African Americans to vote in that state. In 1835, because of fears of the role of free blacks after Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion of 1831, they were disenfranchised by decision of the North Carolina Constitutional Convention. At the same time, convention delegates relaxed religious and property qualifications for whites, thus expanding the franchise for them.[27]
Alabama entered the union in 1819 with universal white suffrage provided in its constitution.

text: When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War, it granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction. In 1869, the Fifteenth Amendment prohibited the government from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude". The major effect of these amendments was to enfranchise African American men, the overwhelming majority of whom were freedmen in the South.[28]

text: After the war, some southern states passed "Black Codes", state laws to restrict the new freedoms of African Americans. They attempted to control their movement, assembly, working conditions and other civil rights. Some states also prohibited them from voting.[28]

text: The Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution, one of three ratified after the American Civil War to grant freedmen full rights of citizenship, prevented any state from denying the right to vote to any citizen based on race. This was primarily related to protecting the franchise of freedmen, but it also applied to non-white minorities, such as Mexican Americans in Texas. The state governments under Reconstruction adopted new state constitutions or amendments designed to protect the ability of freedmen to vote. The white resistance to black suffrage after the war regularly erupted into violence as white groups tried to protect their power. Particularly in the South, in the aftermath of the Civil War whites made efforts to suppress freedmen's voting. In the 1860s, secret vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) used violence and intimidation to keep freedmen in a controlled role and reestablish white supremacy. But, black freedmen registered and voted in high numbers, and many were elected to local offices through the 1880s.

text: In the mid-1870s, the insurgencies continued with a rise in more powerful white paramilitary groups, such as the White League, originating in Louisiana in 1874 after a disputed gubernatorial election; and the Red Shirts, originating in Mississippi in 1875 and developing numerous chapters in North and South Carolina; as well as other "White Line" rifle clubs. They operated openly, were more organized than the KKK, and directed their efforts at political goals: to disrupt Republican organizing, turn Republicans out of office, and intimidate or kill blacks to suppress black voting. They worked as "the military arm of the Democratic Party".[29] For instance, estimates were that 150 blacks were killed in North Carolina before the 1876 elections. Economic tactics such as eviction from rental housing or termination of employment were also used to suppress the black vote. White Democrats regained power in state legislatures across the South by the late 1870s, and the federal government withdrew its troops as a result of a national compromise related to the presidency, officially ending Reconstruction.

text: African Americans were a majority in three southern states following the Civil War, and represented over 40% of the population in four other states. While they did not elect a majority of African Americans to office in any state legislature during Reconstruction, whites still feared and resented the political power exercised by freedmen.[30] After ousting the Republicans, whites worked to restore white supremacy.

text: Although elections were often surrounded by violence, blacks continued to vote and gained many local offices in the late 19th century. In the late 19th century, a Populist-Republican coalition in several states gained governorships and some congressional seats in 1894. To prevent such a coalition from forming again and reduce election violence, the Democratic Party, dominant in all southern state legislatures, took action to disfranchise most blacks and many poor whites outright.

text: From 1890 to 1908, ten of the eleven former Confederate states completed political suppression and exclusion of these groups by ratifying new constitutions or amendments which incorporated provisions to make voter registration more difficult. These included such requirements as payment of poll taxes, complicated record keeping, complicated timing of registration and length of residency in relation to elections, with related record-keeping requirements; felony disenfranchisement focusing on crimes thought to be committed by African Americans,[31] and a literacy test or comprehension test.

text: Prospective voters had to prove the ability to read and write the English language to white voter registrars, who in practice applied subjective requirements. Blacks were often denied the right to vote on this basis. Even well-educated blacks were often told they had "failed" such a test, if in fact, it had been administered. On the other hand, illiterate whites were sometimes allowed to vote through a "grandfather clause," which waived literacy requirements if one's grandfather had been a qualified voter before 1866, or had served as a soldier, or was from a foreign country. As most blacks had grandfathers who were slaves before 1866 and could not have fulfilled any of those conditions, they could not use the grandfather clause exemption. Selective enforcement of the poll tax was frequently also used to disqualify black and poor white voters. As a result of these measures, at the turn of the century voter rolls dropped markedly across the South. Most blacks and many poor whites were excluded from the political system for decades. Unable to vote, they were also excluded from juries or running for any office.

text: In Alabama, for example, its 1901 constitution restricted the franchise for poor whites as well as blacks. It contained requirements for payment of cumulative poll taxes, completion of literacy tests, and increased residency at state, county and precinct levels, effectively disenfranchised tens of thousands of poor whites as well as most blacks. Historian J. Morgan Kousser found, "They disfranchised these whites as willingly as they deprived blacks of the vote."[32] By 1941, more whites than blacks in total had been disenfranchised.[33]

text: Legal challenges to disfranchisement[edit]

text: Although African Americans quickly began legal challenges to such provisions in the 19th century, it was years before any were successful before the U.S. Supreme Court. Booker T. Washington, better known for his public stance of trying to work within societal constraints of the period at Tuskegee University, secretly helped fund and arrange representation for numerous legal challenges to disfranchisement. He called upon wealthy Northern allies and philanthropists to raise funds for the cause.[34] The Supreme Court's upholding of Mississippi's new constitution, in Williams v. Mississippi (1898), encouraged other states to follow the Mississippi plan of disfranchisement. African Americans brought other legal challenges, as in Giles v. Harris (1903) and Giles v. Teasley (1904), but the Supreme Court upheld Alabama constitutional provisions. In 1915 Oklahoma was the last state to append a grandfather clause to its literacy requirement due to Supreme Court cases.

text: From early in the 20th century, the newly established National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) took the lead in organizing or supporting legal challenges to segregation and disfranchisement. Gradually they planned the strategy of which cases to take forward. In Guinn v. United States (1915), the first case in which the NAACP filed a brief, the Supreme Court struck down the grandfather clause in Oklahoma and Maryland. Other states in which it was used had to retract their legislation as well. The challenge was successful.

text: But, nearly as rapidly as the Supreme Court determined a specific provision was unconstitutional, state legislatures developed new statutes to continue disenfranchisement. For instance, in Smith v. Allwright (1944), the Supreme Court struck down the use of state-sanctioned all-white primaries by the Democratic Party in the South. States developed new restrictions on black voting; Alabama passed a law giving county registrars more authority as to which questions they asked applicants in comprehension or literacy tests. The NAACP continued with steady progress in legal challenges to disenfranchisement and segregation.

text: In 1957, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 to implement the Fifteenth Amendment. It established the United States Civil Rights Commission; among its duties is to investigate voter discrimination.

text: As late as 1962, programs such as Operation Eagle Eye in Arizona attempted to stymie minority voting through literacy tests. The 24th Amendment was ratified in 1964 to prohibit poll taxes as a condition of voter registration and voting in federal elections. Many states continued to use them in state elections as a means of reducing the number of voters.

text: The American Civil Rights Movement, through such events as the Selma to Montgomery marches and Freedom Summer in Mississippi, gained passage by the United States Congress of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which authorized federal oversight of voter registration and election practices and other enforcement of voting rights. Congress passed the legislation because it found "case by case litigation was inadequate to combat widespread and persistent discrimination in voting". Activism by African Americans helped secure an expanded and protected franchise that has benefited all Americans, including racial and language minorities.

text: The bill provided for federal oversight, if necessary, to ensure just voter registration and election procedures. The rate of African-American registration and voting in Southern states climbed dramatically and quickly, but it has taken years of federal oversight to work out the processes and overcome local resistance. In addition, it was not until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966) that all state poll taxes (for both state and federal elections) were officially declared unconstitutional as violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This removed a burden on the poor.

text: Legal challenges have continued under the Voting Rights Act, primarily in areas of redistricting and election systems, for instance, challenging at-large election systems that effectively reduce the ability of minority groups to elect candidates of their choice. Such challenges have particularly occurred at the county and municipal level, including for school boards, where exclusion of minority groups and candidates at such levels has been persistent in some areas of the country. This reduces the ability of women and minorities to participate in the political system and gain entry-level experience.

text: Women[edit]

text: A parallel, yet separate, movement was that for women's suffrage. Leaders of the suffrage movement included Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Alice Paul. In some ways this, too, could be said to have grown out of the American Civil War, as women had been strong leaders of the abolition movement. Middle- and upper-class women generally became more politically active in the northern tier during and after the war.

text: In 1848, the Seneca Falls Convention, the first women's rights convention, was held in Seneca Falls, New York. Of the 300 present, 68 women and 32 men signed the Declaration of Sentiments which defined the women's rights movement. The first National Women's Rights Convention took place in 1850 in Worcester, Massachusetts, attracting more than 1,000 participants. This national convention was held yearly through 1860.

text: When Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton formed the National Women Suffrage Association, their goal was to help women gain voting rights through reliance on the Constitution. Also, in 1869 Lucy Stone and Henry Blackwell formed the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA). However, AWSA focused on gaining voting rights for women through the amendment process. Although these two organization were fighting for the same cause, it was not until 1890 that they merged to form the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). After the merger of the two organizations, the (NAWSA) waged a state-by-state campaign to obtain voting rights for women.

text: Wyoming was the first state in which women were able to vote, although it was a condition of the transition to statehood. Utah was the second territory to allow women to vote, but the federal Edmunds–Tucker Act of 1887 repealed woman's suffrage in Utah. Colorado was the first established state to allow women to vote on the same basis as men. Some other states also extended the franchise to women before the Constitution was amended to this purpose.

text: During the 1910s Alice Paul, assisted by Lucy Burns and many others, organized such events and organizations as the 1913 Women's Suffrage Parade, the National Woman's Party, and the Silent Sentinels. At the culmination of the suffragists' requests and protests, ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment gave women the right to vote in time to participate in the Presidential election of 1920.

text: Another political movement that was largely driven by women in the same era was the anti-alcohol Temperance movement, which led to the Eighteenth Amendment and Prohibition.[35]

text: Washington, D.C.[edit]

text: Washington, D.C., was created from a portion of the states of Maryland and Virginia in 1801. The Virginia portion was retroceded (returned) to Virginia upon request of the residents, by an Act of Congress in 1846 to protect slavery, and restore state and federal voting rights in that portion of Virginia. When Maryland delegated a portion of its land to Congress so that it could be used as the Nation's capital, Congress did not continue Maryland Voting Laws. It canceled all state and federal elections starting with 1802. Local elections limped on in some neighborhoods, until 1871, when local elections were also forbidden by the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress is the National Legislature. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, Congress has the sole authority to exercise "Exclusive Legislature in all cases whatsoever" over the nation's capital and over federal military bases. Active disfranchisement is typically a States Rights Legislative issue, where the removal of voting rights is permitted. At the national level, the federal government typically ignored voting rights issues, or affirmed that they were extended.

text: Congress, when exercising "exclusive legislation" over U.S. Military Bases in the United States, and Washington, D.C., viewed its power as strong enough to remove all voting rights. All state and federal elections were canceled by Congress in D.C. and all of Maryland's voting Rights laws no longer applied to D.C. when Maryland gave up that land. Congress did not pass laws to establish local voting processes in the District of Columbia. This omission of law strategy to disfranchise is contained in the Congressional debates in Annals of Congress in 1800 and 1801.

text: In 1986, the US Congress voted to restore voting rights on U.S. Military bases for all state and federal elections.

text: D.C., citizens were granted the right to vote in Presidential elections in 1961, after the ratification of the twenty-third amendment. Amendment 23 is the only known limit to U.S. Congressional powers, forcing Congress to enforce Amendments 14, 15, 19, 24, and 26 for the first time in Presidential elections. The Maryland citizens and territory converted in Washington, D.C., in 1801 were represented in 1801 by U.S. Rep. John Chew Thomas from Maryland's 2nd, and U.S. Rep. William Craik from Maryland's 3rd Congressional Districts. These Maryland U.S. Congressional Districts were redrawn and removed from Washington, D.C.

text: No full Congressional elections have been held since in D.C., a gap continuing since 1801. Congress created a non-voting substitute for a U.S. Congressman, a Delegate, between 1871–1875, but then abolished that post as well. Congress permitted restoration of local elections and home rule for the District on December 24, 1973. In 1971, Congress still opposed restoring the position of a full U.S. Congressman for Washington, D.C. That year it re-established the position of non-voting Delegate to the U.S. Congress.[36]

text: Young people[edit]

text: A third voting rights movement was won in the 1960s to lower the voting age from twenty-one to eighteen. Activists noted that most of the young men who were being drafted to fight in the Vietnam War were too young to have any voice in the selection of the leaders who were sending them to fight. Some states had already lowered the voting age: notably Georgia, Kentucky, and Hawaii, had already permitted voting by persons younger than twenty-one.

text: The Twenty-sixth Amendment, ratified in 1971, prohibits federal and state laws which set a minimum voting age higher than 18 years. As of 2008, no state has opted for an earlier age, although some state governments have discussed it.[37] California has, since the 1980s, allowed persons who are 17 to register to vote for an election where the election itself will occur on or after their 18th birthday, and several states including Indiana allow 17-year-olds to vote in a primary election provided they will be 18 by the general election.

text: Prisoners[edit]

text: Prisoner voting rights are defined by individual states, and the laws are different from state to state. Some states allow only individuals on probation to vote. Others allow individuals on parole and probation. As of 2012, only three states, Florida, Kentucky and Virginia, continue to impose a lifelong denial of the right to vote to all citizens with a felony record, absent a restoration of rights granted by the Governor or state legislature.[38] However, in Kentucky, a felon's rights can be restored after the completion of a restoration process to regain civil rights.[38][39]

text: In 2007, Florida legislature restored voting rights to convicted felons who had served their sentences. In March 2011, however, Governor Rick Scott reversed the 2007 reforms. He signed legislation that permanently disenfranchises citizens with past felony convictions.[40]

text: In July 2005, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack issued an executive order restoring the right to vote for all persons who have completed supervision.[38] On October 31, 2005, Iowa's Supreme Court upheld mass reenfranchisement of convicted felons. Nine other states disenfranchise felons for various lengths of time following the completion of their probation or parole.

text: Other than Maine and Vermont, all U.S. states prohibit felons from voting while they are in prison.[41] In Puerto Rico, felons in prison are allowed to vote in elections.

text: Practices in the United States are in contrast to some European nations, such as Norway. Some nations[42] allow prisoners to vote. Prisoners have been allowed to vote in Canada since 2002.[43]

text: The United States has a higher proportion of its population in prison than any other Western nation,[44] and more than Russia or China.[45] The dramatic rise in the rate of incarceration in the United States, a 500% increase from the 1970s to the 1990s,[46] has vastly increased the number of people disenfranchised because of the felon provisions.

text: According to the Sentencing Project, as of 2010 an estimated 5.9 million Americans are denied the right to vote because of a felony conviction, a number equivalent to 2.5% of the U.S. voting-age population and a sharp increase from the 1.2 million people affected by felony disenfranchisement in 1976.[46] Given the prison populations, the effects have been most disadvantageous for minority and poor communities.[47]

text: Durational residency[edit]

text: The Supreme Court of the United States struck down one-year residency requirements to vote in Dunn v. Blumstein 405 U.S. 330 (1972).[48] The Court ruled that limits on voter registration of up to 30 to 50 days prior to an election were permissible for logistical reasons, but that residency requirements in excess of that violated the equal protection clause, as granted under the Fourteenth Amendment, according to strict scrutiny.

text: Homelessness[edit]

text: Obstacles homeless citizens face during voter registration[edit]

text: In the 1980s homelessness was recognized as an increasing national problem. By the early 21st century, there have been numerous court cases to help protect the voting rights of persons without a fixed address. Low income and homeless citizens face some obstacles in registering to vote. These obstacles include establishing residency, providing a mailing address, and showing proof of identification. A residency requirement varies from state to state. States cannot require citizens to show residency of more than 30 days before Election Day. The states of Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming allow voters to register on Election Day. North Dakota does not require voters to register.[49]

text: In the 21st century, homeless persons in all states have the right to register and vote if they satisfy other conditions. In most states, when registering to vote, homeless voters may designate any place of residence, including a street corner, a park, a shelter, or any other location where an individual stays at night. A citizen may only have one residency during registration, but they may switch their registration each time they change locations.[50] Designating residency is needed to prove that the citizen lives within the district where he or she wishes to vote. Some states also require a mailing address in order to send out the voter ID card, which the individual must show on Election Day. Some states allow individuals to use PO Boxes as mailing addresses; other states allow the address to be that of a local shelter, advocacy organization, outreach center, or anywhere else that accepts mail on behalf of a person registering to vote. States such as Arizona and Nebraska allow homeless citizens to use county court houses or county clerks’ offices as mailing address.

text: States that do not require a mailing address include Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.[51]

text: All potential voters face new requirements since 2002, when President Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).[52][53] It requires voters to provide their driver's license numbers, or the last four digits of their Social Security Number on their voter registration form. This has been enforced.

text: The National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH) assists nonprofit organizations, in getting lower income and homeless citizens registered to vote. In 1992, the NCH created a campaign called "You don’t need a home to vote".[54] This campaign provided useful resources and guidelines for nonprofit organizations to follow when assisting citizens to register. Nonprofits, like homeless shelters and food banks, set up a voter registration party to help homeless citizens to register. The nonprofit workers must remain nonpartisan when assisting in the registration process.

text: Court cases involving homeless voting[edit]

text: Voting rights of the American homeless is an issue that has been addressed in the courts since the 1980s. Each state is responsible for voting regulations in their area; however, many states throughout America have adopted similar laws regarding homeless citizen voting. Disenfranchising the homeless is considered a violation of their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Many arguments have been made against homeless people being able to vote. Their status of true citizenship has been called into question because of their lack of residency. However, the courts have ruled on more than one occasion in favor of the homeless voting.

text: One of the first court cases regarding homeless voting was Pitts v. Black in New York. The US district court ruled that disenfranchising homeless citizens is a direct violation of the Equal Protection clause found in the Fourteenth Amendment.

text: Pitts v. Black (1984): This case heard by the US District Court of Southern New York case involved the New York Election Board and homeless individuals assisted by the Coalition for the Homeless, among others. The Election Board denied the individuals the right to vote because they resided on the street or in shelters. The Election Board contended that residency required some claim (such as rent) or ownership of the area that they resided on.[55] Before the court decision was made, the Election Board relented slightly and allowed those living in shelters the right to vote.[56] The District Court defined the meaning of "residence" as any fixed location which the individual intends to inhabit regularly. This ruling encompassed all homeless, including those residing on streets and in parks.[55][57]

text: Two California court rulings, Collier v. Menzel, and Walters v. Weed, also addressed the residency question of homeless voters:

text:
Collier v. Menzel (1985): The Santa Barbara District Court case established that a residence could be a certain location rather than a specific address. Howard Menzel, the county clerk, rejected three voter registration applications on the grounds that proper addresses were not provided. The applications simply stated a public park as the applicants' residence. The court overruled the clerk's decision and defined a residence as any fixed location where a person habitually sleeps and where living quarters are set up. In their final decisions, the court stated that denying a citizen the right to vote due to residence in a public park, is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause.[57][58]
Walters v. Weed (1988): In 1988, the California Supreme Court judged a case concerning voter precincts of those who are between residences. The court ruled that when a person leaves his former place of residence and has not yet settled in another permanent living place, then the individual may vote in the precinct of his former residence.[57][59]

text: Special interest elections[edit]

text: Several locales retained restrictions for specialized local elections, such as for school boards, special districts, or bond issues. Property restrictions, duration of residency restrictions, and, for school boards, restrictions of the franchise to voters with children, remained in force. In a series of rulings from 1969 to 1973, the Court ruled that the franchise could be restricted in some cases to those "primarily interested" or "primarily affected" by the outcome of a specialized election, but not in the case of school boards or bond issues, which affected taxation to be paid by all residents.[9] In Ball v. James 451 U.S. 335 (1981), the Court further upheld a system of plural voting, by which votes for the board of directors of a water reclamation district were allocated on the basis of a person's proportion of land owned in the district.[9]

text: The Court has overseen operation of political party primaries to ensure open voting. While states were permitted to require voters to register for a political party 30 days before an election, or to require them to vote in only one party primary, the state could not prevent a voter from voting in a party primary if the voter has voted in another party's primary in the last 23 months.[9] The Court also ruled that a state may not mandate a "closed primary" system and bar independents from voting in a party's primary against the wishes of the party. (Tashijan v. Republican Party of Connecticut 479 U.S. 208 (1986))[60]

text: The Office of Hawaiian Affairs of the state of Hawaii, created in 1978, limited voting eligibility and candidate eligibility to native Hawaiians on whose behalf it manages 1,800,000 acres (7,300 km2) of ceded land. The Supreme Court of the United States struck down the franchise restriction under the Fifteenth Amendment in Rice v. Cayetano 528 U.S. 495 (2000), following by eliminating the candidate restriction in Arakaki v. State of Hawai‘i a few months later.

text: Current status[edit]

text: By region[edit]

text: District of Columbia[edit]

text: Citizens of the nation's capital, Washington, D.C., have not been apportioned a representative or US senator in Congress. This is because D.C. is a federal district and not a state and under the Constitution, only states are apportioned congresspersons.

text: District of Columbia citizens had voting rights removed in 1801 by Congress, when Maryland delegated that portion of its land to Congress. Congress incrementally removed effective local control or home rule by 1871. It restored some home rule in 1971, but maintained the authority to override any local laws. Washington, D.C., does not have full representation in the U.S. House or Senate. The Twenty-third Amendment, restoring U.S. Presidential Election after a 164-year-gap, is the only known limit to Congressional "exclusive legislature" from Article I-8-17, forcing Congress to enforce for the first time Amendments 14,15,19, 24, and 26. Amendment 23 gave the District of Columbia three electors and hence the right to vote for President, but not full U.S. Congresspersons nor U.S. Senators. In 1978, Congress proposed a constitutional amendment that would have restored to the District a full seat for representation in the Congress as well. This amendment failed to receive ratification by sufficient number of states within the seven years required.

text: As of 2013[update], a bill is pending in Congress that would treat the District of Columbia as "a congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives", and permit United States citizens residing in the capital to vote for a member to represent them in the House of Representatives. The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act, S. 160, 111th Cong. was passed by the U.S. Senate on February 26, 2009, by a vote of 61-37.[61]

text: On April 1, 1993, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States received a petition from Timothy Cooper on behalf of the Statehood Solidarity Committee (the "Petitioners") against the government of the United States (the "State" or "United States"). The petition indicated that it was presented on behalf of the members of the Statehood Solidarity Committee and all other U.S. citizens resident in the District of Columbia. The petition alleged that the United States was responsible for violations of Articles II (right to equality before law) and XX (right to vote and to participate in government) of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man in connection with the inability of citizens of the District of Columbia to vote for and elect a representative to the U.S. Congress. On December 29, 2003, The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights having examined the information and arguments provided by the parties on the question of admissibility. Without prejudging the merits of the matter, the Commission decided to admit the present petition in respect of Articles II and XX of the American Declaration. In addition, the Commission concluded that the United States violates the Petitioners’ rights under Articles II and XX of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man by denying District of Columbia citizens an effective opportunity to participate in their federal legislature.[62]

text: Overseas and nonresident citizens[edit]

text: U.S. citizens residing overseas who would otherwise have the right to vote are guaranteed the right to vote in federal elections by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) of 1986.[15] As a practical matter, individual states implement UOCAVA.

text: U.S. citizens who reside in Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, or the United States Virgin Islands are not allowed to vote in U.S. national and presidential elections, as these U.S. territories belong to the United States but are not part of the United States. The U.S. Constitution requires a voter to be resident in one of the 50 states or in the District of Columbia to vote in federal elections. To say that the Constitution does not require extension of federal voting rights to U.S. territories residents does not, however, exclude the possibility that the Constitution may permit their enfranchisement under another source of law.[63]

text: A citizen who has never resided in the United States can vote if a parent is eligible to vote in certain states.[64] In some of these states the citizen can vote in local, state and federal elections, in others in federal elections only.

text: Puerto Rico[edit]

text: Puerto Rico is an insular area — a United States territory that is neither a part of one of the fifty states nor a part of the District of Columbia, the nation's federal district. Insular areas, such as Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam, are not allowed to choose electors in U.S. presidential elections or elect voting members to the U.S. Congress. This grows out of Article I and Article II of the United States Constitution, which specifically mandate that electors are to be chosen by "the People of the several States". In 1961, the 23rd amendment to the constitution extended the right to choose electors to the District of Columbia.

text: Any U.S. citizen who resides in Puerto Rico (whether a Puerto Rican or not) is effectively disenfranchised at the national level. Although the Republican Party and Democratic Party chapters in Puerto Rico have selected voting delegates to the national nominating conventions participating in U.S. presidential primaries or caucuses, U.S. citizens not residing in one of the 50 states or in the District of Columbia may not vote in federal elections.

text: Various scholars (including a prominent U.S. judge in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit) conclude that the U.S. national-electoral process is not fully democratic due to U.S. government disenfranchisement of U.S. citizens residing in Puerto Rico.[65][66]

text: As of 2010[update], under Igartúa v. United States, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is judicially considered not to be self-executing, and therefore requires further legislative action to put it into effect domestically. Judge Kermit Lipez wrote in a concurring opinion, however, that the en banc majority's conclusion that the ICCPR is non-self-executing is ripe for reconsideration in a new en banc proceeding, and that if issues highlighted in a partial dissent by Judge Juan R. Torruella were to be decided in favor of the plaintiffs, United States citizens residing in Puerto Rico would have a viable claim to equal voting rights .[63]

text: Congress has in fact acted in partial compliance with its obligations under the ICCPR when, in 1961, just a few years after the United Nations first ratified the ICCPR, it amended our fundamental charter to allow the United States citizens who reside in the District of Columbia to vote for the Executive offices. See U.S. Constitutional Amendment XXIII.51. Indeed, a bill is now pending in Congress that would treat the District of Columbia as "a congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives", and permit United States citizens residing in the capitol to vote for members of the House of Representatives. See District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act, S.160, 111th Congress (passed by the Senate, February 26, 2009) (2009).52  However, the United States has not taken similar "steps" with regard to the five million United States citizens who reside in the other U.S. territories, of which close to four million are residents of Puerto Rico. This inaction is in clear violation of the United States' obligations under the ICCPR".[63]

text: Accessibility[edit]

text: Federal legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA, or "Motor-Voter Act") and the Help America Vote Act of 2001 (HAVA) help to address some of the concerns of disabled and non-English speaking voters in the United States.

text: Some studies have shown that polling places are inaccessible to disabled voters.[67] The Federal Election Commission reported that, in violation of state and federal laws, more than 20,000 polling places across the nation are inaccessible, depriving people with disabilities of their fundamental right to vote.

text: In 1999, the Attorney General of the State of New York ran a check of polling places around the state to see if they were accessible to voters with disabilities and found many problems. A study of three upstate counties of New York found fewer than 10 percent of polling places fully compliant with state and federal laws.[68]

text: Many polling booths are set in church basements or in upstairs meeting halls where there are no ramps or elevators. This means problems not just for people who use wheelchairs, but for people using canes or walkers too. And in most states people who are blind do not have access to Braille ballot to vote; they have to bring someone along to vote for them. Studies have shown that people with disabilities are more interested in government and public affairs than most and are more eager to participate in the democratic process. [67] Many election officials urge people with disabilities to vote absentee, however some disabled individuals see this as an inferior form of participation.[69]

text: Voter turnout is lower among the disabled. In the 2012 United States presidential election 56.8% of people with disabilities reported voting, compared to the 62.5% of eligible citizens without disabilities.[70]

text: Candidacy requirements[edit]

text: Jurisprudence concerning candidacy rights and the rights of citizens to create a political party are less clear than voting rights. Different courts have reached different conclusions regarding what sort of restrictions, often in terms of ballot access, public debate inclusion, filing fees, and residency requirements, may be imposed.

text: In Williams v. Rhodes (1968), the United States Supreme Court struck down Ohio ballot access laws on First and Fourteenth Amendment grounds. However, it subsequently upheld such laws in several other cases. States can require an independent or minor party candidate to collect signatures as high as five percent of the total votes cast in a particular preceding election before the court will intervene.

text: The Supreme Court has also upheld a state ban on cross-party endorsements (also known as electoral fusion) and primary write-in votes.

text: Noncitizen voting[edit]

text: More than 40 states or territories, including colonies before the Declaration of Independence, have at some time allowed noncitizens who satisfied residential requirements to vote in some or all elections. This in part reflected the strong continuing immigration to the United States. Some cities like Chicago, towns or villages (in Maryland) today allow noncitizen residents to vote in school or local elections.[71][19][72][73] In 1875, the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett noted that "citizenship has not in all cases been made a condition precedent to the enjoyment of the right of suffrage. Thus, in Missouri, persons of foreign birth, who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, may under certain circumstances vote".[74] Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections.[75]


document_title: The Loud House

question_text: who does carlos play in the loud house

question_tokens: who does carlos play in the loud house

root

text: The Loud House

text: Premise

text: In the fictional town of Royal Woods, Michigan, Lincoln Loud is the only boy and middle child in a family of eleven children. He has ten sisters with distinctive personalities: bossy eldest that always talks to her boyfriend Bobby child Lori; ditzy fashionista Leni; musician Luna; comedian Luan; athletic Lynn; gloomy goth Lucy; polar-opposite twins Lana and Lola; child genius Lisa, and baby Lily. Lincoln often during the series to avoid problems and to be loved by his family, occasionally breaks the fourth wall to explain to viewers the chaotic conditions and sibling relationships of the household, and continually devises plans to make his life in the house better.

tag: p

text: Characters

text: Main

text: Lincoln Loud (voiced by Sean Ryan Fox in the pilot, Grant Palmer in episodes 1–22,[6] Collin Dean in episodes 23–present) – The 11-year-old middle child and only son of the Loud family, who has white hair and a chipped front tooth. Lincoln has a passion for comic books and is often shown reading them in his underwear. He often cosplays as the fictional superhero Ace Savvy. He breaks the fourth wall on a regular basis by speaking to the audience about the chaotic conditions and sibling relationships of his household.

text: Lori Loud (voiced by Catherine Taber)[7] – The 17-year-old eldest child of the Loud family and the only Loud child with a driver's license. Lori is depicted as a bossy, short-tempered, sarcastic, and cynical teenager who is condescending towards her younger siblings. Despite this, she cares deeply about her family. Lori is usually seen holding her smartphone, includes the word "literally" in some of her sentences, and has a boyfriend named Bobby.

text: Leni Loud (voiced by Liliana Mumy)[8] – The 16-year-old second-eldest child of the Loud family who always wears sunglasses on top of her head. Leni is depicted as a beautiful, ditzy and air-headed dumb blonde who shows talents in fashion designing, wood-carving, and lock-picking. Leni has a fear of spiders that is referenced in multiple episodes, most notably "Along Came a Sister." As Lori's roommate, Leni would tend to borrow some of Lori's clothes without asking which leads to them occasionally fighting over them.

text: Luna Loud (voiced by Nika Futterman)[9] – The 15-year-old third-eldest child of the Loud family. Luna has a habit of speaking in a mock British accent and sometimes a mock Swedish accent. She is a wild and upbeat musician who owns various instruments, with her signature instrument being a purple Dean electric guitar. She very closely follows the words of her idol Mick Swagger and always encourages her family to "stay cool." In the episode "For Bros About to Rock," it is revealed that Luna has ruined all of her siblings' first concerts. She also appears to hold the youngest child Lily the most out of her other siblings. It is revealed at the end of the episode "L is for Love" that she is bisexual (on the account that she did have an interest for Lincoln's tutor Hugh in the episode "Study Muffin" and at the same time has a crush on Sam who was revealed to be a girl at the end of the "L Is for Love" episode).

text: Luan Loud (voiced by Cristina Pucelli)[6] – The 14-year-old fourth-oldest of the Loud family and the comedian of the bunch who is Luna's roommate. Most of her dialogue consists of bad puns followed by her laughter and words "Get It?" much to the disdain of her siblings. She has braces, wears squirt-flowers on her shirt and shoes, owns a wooden ventriloquist dummy named Mr. Coconuts, and at some times will be seen with a camera. Every April Fools Day, Luan becomes a prank-obsessed maniac which leaves her family and Clyde in complete fear of the holiday as they try to avoid her pranks. In addition to being a comedian, there are instances where she is an expert mime artist.

text: Lynn Loud (voiced by Jessica DiCicco)[6] – The 13-year-old fifth-oldest child of the Loud family who is the athlete and the youngest teenager. She tends to start competitions among her siblings and plays a large amount of sports like baseball, basketball, football, and soccer. In addition, Lynn Loud can also be good at the various forms of martial arts like kick boxing, lucha libre, and parkour. She owns a soccer ball, a basketball, a football, and numerous hockey sticks. Lynn is named after her father who addresses her as "Lynn Jr." in the episode "Overnight Success."

text: Lucy Loud (voiced by Jessica DiCicco)[6] – The 8-year-old fifth-youngest child of the Loud family and Lynn's roommate. Lucy is a gothic girl with interests in poetry, séances, and gothic fiction as well as owning some pet bats. She has pale skin and long black hair that conceals her eyes. Lucy also has an uncanny ability to suddenly appear in places, which often frightens her siblings. In the episode "Sleuth or Consequences," it is revealed that she reads "Princess Pony" books because, as she puts it, she "needs a break" from her gothic lifestyle once in a while.

text: Lana Loud (voiced by Grey Griffin)[6] – The 6-year-old fourth-youngest child of the Loud family[10] and the identical twin sister of Lola where they both share the same room and have two missing top teeth. Lana was born two minutes before Lola and has a gap in her upper teeth. She is a fun-loving tomboy who loves to get her hands dirty, which often annoys Lola. She is also a skilled handyworker as shown in the televised version of the show's theme song and some episodes where she would often handle some plumbing work. Lana takes care of many animals that she keeps in her room where most of them are frogs and reptiles. In "Baby Steps," it is revealed that Lana is afraid of heights. In "Fool's Paradise," it is revealed that Lana is allergic to rhubarb.

text: Lola Loud (voiced by Grey Griffin)[6] – The 6-year-old third-youngest child of the Loud family and the identical twin sister of Lana where they both share the same room and have two missing top teeth. Lola is a bratty girly girl who is skilled at plotting and scheming to get her way. She assumes the role of an antagonist if her siblings, particularly Lincoln, anger her in any way. Lola is mostly seen wearing a pink dress that conceals her legs. She is constantly entered in child beauty pageants and is the tattletale of the group.

text: Lisa Loud (voiced by Lara Jill Miller)[11] – The 4-year-old second-youngest child of the Loud family and a child prodigy who has a PhD and is a Nobel Prize recipient yet is still in kindergarten. She enjoys solving complex equations and math problems and performing elaborate experiments where she would often using her siblings and Clyde as test subjects. She wears round glasses, speaks with a lateral lisp, and laughs maniacally when performing experiments. As seen in "Heavy Meddle" and "11 Louds a Leapin'," Lisa is almost always devoid of emotions. In "April Fools Rules," it is revealed that Lisa's middle name is Marie. In "Snow Bored," it is revealed that Lisa has connections to NASA. In "Party Down," it has been shown that Lisa can be hyped up on sugar as seen from her consumption of chocolate from her homemade chocolate fountain.

text: Lily Loud (voiced by Grey Griffin)[6] – The 15 month baby who is the youngest child of the Loud family and is mostly seen wearing a diaper. Lincoln shares a special connection with Lily and babysits her on several occasions. Lily can walk independently and always be occasionally carried by any of her older siblings or her parents for longer distances. She has a habit of losing her diaper causing her to go in the nude and also causing her fellow siblings to put the diaper back on. The only phrase Lily utters aside from gibberish is "poo-poo," generally coupled with her diaper flying across the screen. Outside of the fact that her gibberish can be understood by Lincoln, Luan, and her roommate Lisa, Lily has said some occasional words and has been shown to be a fast learner as seen when she operates some technology.

text: Clyde McBride (voiced by Caleel Harris)[6] – A nerdy 11-year-old boy who is the best friend of Lincoln and the adoptive son of Howard and Harold. He is an African-American only child and spends almost all of his time with Lincoln. Clyde owns a walkie-talkie that he uses on missions. Clyde shares many interests with Lincoln such as video games and science fiction movies. He harbors an unrequited crush on Lori and tends to faint when she talks to him. When Lincoln cosplays as Ace Savvy, Clyde dresses as his sidekick One-Eyed Jack. Early in the show's development when the Loud family was originally composed of anthropomorphic rabbits, Clyde was a beaver.[12]

text: Supporting

text: Lynn Loud Sr. (voiced by Brian Stepanek) – The balding father of the Loud children. His whole face is unseen until the second season. Lynn Sr. often breaks up fights between his children before it goes too far and does all the cooking in the family as he dreams of being a chef. In "Along Came a Sister", it is revealed that he has a fear of spiders like Leni. At the end of "Ties That Bind," it is revealed that Lynn Loud Sr. can only eat gluten-free foods. In "A Novel Idea", Lynn Sr. is shown to work at an office building where he worked as an IT worker as revealed in "Job Insecurity". In "Toads and Tiaras," it is revealed that Lynn Jr. inherited his love of sports from him. In "Cover Girls", it is revealed that Luan inherited her bad sense of humor from him. In "Study Muffin", it is implied that Luna gets her British accent from him. In "Fed Up," it is revealed that Lynn Loud Sr. follows his food budget due to how big his family is. In "Job Insecurity," Lynn Sr. has resigned from his job as an IT worker and has risen to the ranks of co-chef at the Aloha Comrade Hawaiian Russian Fusion Restaurant.

text: Rita Loud (voiced by Jill Talley) – The mother of the Loud children, the daughter of Albert "Pop Pop," and the niece of Ruth. Her whole face is also unseen until the second season. She is the only Loud whose name does not begin with "L". Rita is caring towards her children, but is not afraid to punish them if their fighting goes too far. Rita is shown to be more level-headed than Lynn Sr. In "A Novel Idea", Rita works as a dental assistant and is writing a novel that could lead to a different career path. In "Cover Girls" and "L is for Love," it is revealed that she met Lynn Sr. when she was working as a crossing guard and hooked up with him through secret admirer letters. Her name is a pun on the words "read aloud."

text: Howard and Harold McBride (voiced by Michael McDonald and Wayne Brady)[13] – Clyde's overprotective fathers who care deeply about their son's well-being. Howard is a white man who has red hair and buck teeth while Harold is an African-American man who has thinning black hair and wears a sweater vest with a bow tie. They shower Clyde with attention and rarely let him do anything unsupervised. Howard tends to get over emotional while watching his son grow up and is rather neurotic. Harold is a skilled chef who acts more calm and collected.

text: Roberto "Bobby" Alejandro Martinez-Millan Luis Santiago Jr. (voiced by Carlos PenaVega) – a Mexican-American 17-year-old who is Lori's boyfriend and older brother of Ronnie Anne. Bobby is often nicknamed "Boo Boo Bear" by Lori. He does various odd jobs like grocery store stockboy, lifeguard, mall security guard, pizza delivery man, department store worker, and tour guide. Although he and his family moved away to live with the Casagrande family in "The Loudest Mission: Relative Chaos," he and Lori managed to find a way to make their love relationship work.

text: Ronalda "Ronnie" Anne Santiago (voiced by Breanna Yde) – The younger sister of Bobby who is Lincoln's schoolmate. She is very tough and enjoys skating, video games, and pranks. Ronnie Anne becomes Lincoln's love interest. Although she and her family moved away to live with the Casagrande family in "The Loudest Mission: Relative Chaos," she still tends to contact Lincoln through the laptop and mail him her pranks at her old house.

text: Mr. Grouse (voiced by John DiMaggio) – The elderly bald-headed neighbor of the Loud family. In "11 Louds a Leapin'", it is revealed that Mr. Grouse tends to confiscate any items of the Loud siblings that end up on his property. Also, it is revealed that Mr. Grouse has an extended family that he can barely pay a visit to due to financial difficulties. In most episodes, it is shown that Mr. Grouse can be bribed with certain foods like Lynn Sr.'s lasagna in exchange for favors.

text: Charles – The Loud family's pit bull terrier, who is named after Charles M. Schulz. He is often shown sleeping in Lincoln's room. In the episode "Pets Peeved," Charles is voiced by Dee Bradley Baker.

text: Cliff – The Loud family's pet short-haired cat, who is named after Cliff Sterrett. In the episode "Pets Peeved," Cliff is voiced by Dee Bradley Baker.

text: Geo – The Loud family's pet Roborovski hamster, who is named after George McManus. He normally travels in a hamster ball.

text: Walt – The Loud family's pet canary, who is named after Walt Kelly. Most of the time, he has an angry expression on his face.

text: Recurring

text: Agnes Johnson (voiced by Susanne Blakeslee) – Lincoln and Clyde's teacher at Royal Woods Elementary.

text: Albert "Pop Pop" (voiced by Fred Willard) - Rita's father, Ruth's brother, and the kids' grandfather who is a former army soldier.

text: Chunk (voiced by John DiMaggio) – A burly British man who is Luna's roadie.

text: Flip (voiced by John DiMaggio) – The elderly and smug owner of "Flip's Food N' Fuel."

text: Mick Swagger (voiced by Jeff Bennett) – Luna and Lynn Sr.'s musical idol. He is an obvious parody of Mick Jagger.

text: Coach Pacowski (voiced by Jeff Bennett) – Lincoln and Clyde's gym coach at Royal Woods Elementary who has a crush on Agnes Johnson.

text: Principal Wilbur T. Huggins (voiced by Stephen Tobolowsky) – The Principal of Royal Woods Elementary. Like Lincoln and Clyde, he is also a fan of Ace Savvy.

text: Liam (voiced by Lara Jill Miller) – One of Lincoln's friends who talks with a southern accent. He enjoys loud music exclaiming that he wants the music "turned up to eleven."

text: Rusty Spokes (voiced by Wyatt Griswold) – The talkative member of Papa Wheelie's bicycle gang who is one of Lincoln's schoolmates. In "Back in Black," it is revealed that Rusty has a brother named Rocky.

text: Zach (voiced by Jessica DiCicco) – One of Lincoln's schoolmates. According to Lincoln in "Overnight Success," Zach lives "between a freeway and a circus."

text: Fangs – One of Lucy's pet bats.

text: Hops – Lana's pet frog.

text: Production

text: The Loud House was created by Chris Savino for Nickelodeon. Savino based the series on his own experiences growing up in a large family.[14] Early in development, the Loud family was going to be composed of rabbits, but this was terminated when an employee asked Savino to make them human.[15][16] He pitched the idea to Nickelodeon in 2013 as a 2½-minute short for their annual Animated Shorts Program.[17] In June 2014, Nickelodeon announced that The Loud House had been picked up for a season of 13 episodes.[18] The episode order was later increased to 26.[19] On May 25, 2016, Nickelodeon announced that the series had been picked up for a second season of 14 episodes later increased to 26.[20] On October 19, 2016, the show had been picked up for a third season of 26 episodes.[21] Savino has cited Peanuts and Polly and Her Pals as influences on the show's characterizations and animation. Newspaper comic strips are also influences on the show's background art.

text: Episodes

text:
Season
Segments
Episodes
Originally aired

First aired
Last aired

1
52
26
May 2, 2016 (2016-05-02)
November 8, 2016 (2016-11-08)

2
TBA
TBA
November 9, 2016 (2016-11-09)
TBA

tag: table

text: Film

text: On March 28, 2017, Paramount's motion picture president Marc Evans announced a movie based on the series set for release on February 7, 2020.[2]

text: Broadcast

text: The series debuted on Nickelodeon on Monday, May 2, 2016 at 5:00PM (ET/PT), with new episodes premiering every weekday that month.[22] The first trailer for the series premiered on March 13, 2016.[23] The show is also aired on AFN Family.

text: Internationally, the series premiered in Israel and Italy on May 15.[24] It premiered in Latin America, Brazil, Poland, Germany, France and Africa the following day.[25] It began airing in Southeast Asia on May 20. Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Ireland's Nickelodeon channels premiered the show on May 30.[26] In Canada, YTV aired a sneak peek of the series on September 5, 2016, which was followed by an official premiere on September 6, 2016.[27]

text: The series premiered on May 15, 2016 in the Middle East and North Africa, on Nickelodeon Arabia. However, it is dubbed in Gulf Arabic.

text: Home media

text:
DVD releases

Region
Set title
Seasons
Aspect ratio
Episode count
Time length
Release date

1
Welcome to The Loud House[28]
1
16:9
13
273 minutes
May 23, 2017

text: Reception

text: Ratings

text: The Loud House became the number-one children's animated series on television within its first month on the air.[3] Throughout May 2016, it received an average of 68% more viewers in its target audience of children aged 6–11 than broadcasts on Nickelodeon in May of the previous year.[29] As of June 2016, it was Nickelodeon's highest-rated program, beating SpongeBob SquarePants with an average Nielsen rating of 4.9 among the 2–11 demographic at the time.[30]

text: The Los Angeles Times cited The Loud House as a major factor in maintaining Nickelodeon's position as the highest-rated children's network in summer 2016.[31] During the show's fourth week of premieres, Cyma Zarghami announced that it was continuing to draw more viewers than any other program on the channel.[32]

text: The show's highest-rated episode, with 2.28 million viewers upon its premiere, is "Two Boys and a Baby."[33] This was the first episode to air after it was announced that Howard and Harold McBride would be debuting on the program. The first episode of The Loud House shown at prime time, "11 Louds a Leapin'," was the seventh most-viewed telecast across all U.S. households on Friday, November 25, 2016.[34]

text: Critical reception

text: The Loud House has received positive reviews, specifically for its animation, voice acting, characterization, and the heartwarming themes of each episode. Emily Ashby of Common Sense Media praised the show's voice cast and thematic messages, writing that "kids will come to The Loud House for the laughs, but they'll return for the ensemble cast and the surprisingly heartwarming themes that dominate every story."[35] Kevin Johnson of The A.V. Club gave the show a B+, noting that "the female characters are defined by their traits, but never judged for them."[36]

text: The characters of Howard and Harold McBride have received praise for being a positive representation of a married same-sex couple.[37] They are the first married same-sex couple to be featured in a Nicktoon.[38][39] Laura Bradley of Vanity Fair stated that The Loud House "handles the topic [of same-sex marriage] in exactly the right way...this kind of casual representation in children's programming is a milestone."[40] De Elizabeth of Teen Vogue wrote, "The best part is that the show doesn’t treat these characters any differently, or even introduce them with a heavy asterisk about their marital status."[41] The Frisky's Tai Gooden mentioned that "kids who have two dads (or moms) will be more than thrilled to see a family they can identify with on TV."[42] Time reported that "people are thrilled about Nickelodeon's decision" to include a gay couple.[43] However, the characters have been met with criticism from conservative media groups. The American Family Association objected to scenes featuring the McBride parents and attempted to push for the episode to be edited to no avail, saying that "Nickelodeon should stick to entertaining instead of pushing an agenda."[44] The Kenya Film Classification Board also called for the suspension of the show on Pay TV service provider DStv, saying that the animated series "promotes the Lesbian, Gay and Transgender agenda."[45]

text: Awards and nominations

text: In January 2017, The Loud House's portrayal of Howard and Harold in the episode "Attention Deficit" was nominated for Outstanding Individual Episode at the 28th GLAAD Media Awards.[4] At the 2017 Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards, the show was nominated for Favorite Cartoon. However, it lost to SpongeBob SquarePants.

text:
Year
Presenter
Award/Category
Nominee
Status
Ref.

2017
28th GLAAD Media Awards
Outstanding Individual Episode (for "Attention Deficit")
Nickelodeon
Nominated
[4]

Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards
Favorite Cartoon
The Loud House
Nominated

Young Artist Award
Best Performance in a Voice-Over Role – Teen Actor
Grant Palmer
Won

ASCAP Screen Television Award
Top Television Series
Doug Rockwell, Michelle Lewis, and Phillip Cimino
Won
[46]