People convicted of murder should be able to vote. If our criminal justice system is premised on the twin pillars of punishment (which we’ve gotten very good at indeed) and rehabilitation, the idea that a person who has already served their sentence for a convicted felony must face perpetual punishment from the state defies logic.

And that’s exactly what stripping someone of their right to vote is: punishment.

The United States is one of the few countries where people with felony convictions are prohibited from voting outright. Some countries restrict people with felony convictions from voting if their convictions stem from election crimes or treason. That makes sense. Maybe a person who tries to undermine democracy shouldn’t get to participate in democracy. Certainly if you try to overthrow the government­—or aid those who do—you shouldn’t be able to run for president or hold a position in Congress, but apparently that horse has left the barn.

In truth, it’s not just people convicted of crimes who deserve to vote. Incarcerated people themselves deserve the franchise too. What better way to move the ongoing conversation about criminal justice reform than to actually let people impacted by criminal justice policies to vote for people whose ideas about criminal justice align with theirs? It doesn’t make sense to prohibit incarcerated people from participating in democracy—again, unless they literally incited a mob to overthrow the government.

But even if allowing people in prison to vote is a bridge too far for you, I must ask: What does the crime of killing someone have to do with voting or democracy? After all, this country loves killing people so much that it kills people who have been convicted of killing people (which doesn’t make sense to me, but that’s a discussion for another time).

The answer is that it permits people in power to define what a crime is. And then it permits those same people to determine which crimes are so heinous (by whatever measure powerful people measure heinousness) that one of the most sacred and fought for rights—the right to vote—should be stripped from you forever. It’s a form of voter suppression, but one that doesn’t draw as much indignation: these are criminals, we’re talking about after all.

And that’s when the connection between voting access and the movement underway to criminalize people in the abortion access pipeline becomes apparent: The Supreme Court relegated women and people capable of becoming pregnant to second-class citizens, and now states can ensure that we remain second-class citizens by making it impossible for us to vote our way out of this clusterfuck.

The movement to enfranchise people convicted of felonies has been very successful. Since 2016, the number of people prohibited from voting due to a felony conviction has decreased by 24 percent, according to an October report from the Sentencing Project. That still leaves 4.6 million people disenfranchised, but advocates have worked so hard for these gains and should be feted.

As a result of this advocacy, for example, in 2018, Florida voters by an overwhelming 65 percent decided to restore voting rights to Floridians who had completed their jail sentences. But there was a caveat. First, they would have to pay all of their incurred court fees, which in most cases are prohibitively expensive, thus leaving the person with a felony conviction and attendant court costs disenfranchised. But second, people who were convicted of a violent crime remain disenfranchised.

Other states have similar caveats regarding violent crimes. In Arkansas, Florida, and Wyoming, for example, people who have felony convictions for violent crimes are prohibited from voting.

In Alabama and Mississippi, two of the most abortion-hostile states in the country, people convicted of specific crimes are barred from voting. One of those specified crimes? Murder. And what do Republicans in Mississippi and Alabama (wrongly) think abortion is? If you said murder, give yourself a high-five.

In addition, there are about a dozen states that permit restoration of voting rights upon the completion of the jail sentence; others permit an incarcerated person to vote immediately upon release from prison.

Among these states, however, are some that are right up there with Alabama and Mississippi in terms of abortion rights hostility, and I would expect Republicans in those states to amend their criminal code to make sure that people convicted of violent crimes are permanently disenfranchised. (The bitchassedness of Missouri, Texas, and Georgia comes to mind.)

People who are in the business of “aiding and abetting” abortion may find themselves charged with a felony. And if convicted, they may find themselves banned from voting entirely.

If you’re hardcore enough to help someone get an abortion even though you know it’s illegal, you’re probably a person who is voting in elections for candidates who support abortion rights.

What if your vote is removed permanently? What if the votes of other advocates and mutual aid providers are removed permanently?

You see the problem. It’s a problem that will become more prevalent as state legislatures drop the “we don’t want to criminalize pregnant women” charade, change their criminal codes, and women and people capable of becoming pregnant start racking up felony convictions related to pregnancy loss.

And you can be sure those convicted of felonies will, by and large, be people of color. As the war on medication abortion pills begins to look more and more like the war on drugs that marches inexorably onward even though we’ve been losing it for more than 30 years, the collateral damage from the war on drugs will look the same demographically: People of color locked up in prison because of the choices they make about their bodily autonomy.