Senate committee backs bill to make voting the default for adults under guardianship unless court finds otherwise

Senator Jennifer McClellan Favola’s bill to change how courts treat voting rights in guardianship cases won committee approval Oct. 12 after an extended hearing with advocates, legal specialists and family members.

The bill alters current practice by making the default that an adult subject to a guardianship or conservatorship retains the right to vote unless a judge, after a hearing, finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person lacks the capacity to exercise that right.

Why it matters: Court orders establishing guardianship have sometimes left voting status unclear or resulted in disenfranchisement without families realizing it. Supporters said the change would reduce the cost and delay families face when they must return to court to restore a ward’s voting rights.

What supporters said: Emily Hardy of the Virginia Poverty Law Center and other advocates told the committee they have represented families who were surprised to learn a loved one had been disenfranchised when the guardian petition proceeded without a specific judicial finding about voting. Dennis Finley, a Fairfax father, said his son lost the right to vote after a guardianship proceeding and the family had to return to court to restore it. The League of Women Voters and disability‑rights organizations also testified in favor.

What opponents and questions raised: Committee members asked who would have standing to petition a court to remove voting rights and how the statute would work in practice. Counsel and representatives of the Office of the Executive Secretary described differing views in practice about whether the right is currently removed automatically if orders omit a specific finding. Several senators asked for clarity around who files a petition to challenge voting capacity and how judges should document their findings.

Committee action and next steps: The committee adopted a substitute aligning the statutory standard with a constitutional amendment discussed earlier in the session and reported the bill to the Senate, tally recorded as Ayes 10, No 2, Abstentions 3. Sponsors said they would work with courts and guardianship stakeholders to prepare guidance on the new process.

Quote

- “This ends up being a very, very costly maneuver for the family members who didn’t realize their family members were losing the right to vote,” Emily Hardy said during testimony.

Clarifying detail: The substitute uses a clear‑and‑convincing evidence standard for removing voting rights and directs that information relevant to voting capacity be included in the guardian‑ad‑litem report and considered at the initial hearing.

Context: The bill follows training and advocacy work by disability law and civil‑liberties groups seeking to prevent inadvertent disenfranchisement. Committee members noted training for judges and updates to court forms may be necessary to ensure consistent implementation.

Ending: Sponsors asked the Senate to consider technical fixes on the floor and for the courts to prepare guidance so the change, if approved by the legislature, would be applied uniformly.