As levels of criminal punishment have risen in the United States, more and more citizens have been disenfranchised because of a felony conviction. This paper provides an overview and analysis of the unique practice of felon disenfranchisement in the United States today. We focus in particular on the political impact of disenfranchising large numbers of nonincarcerated felons-those who have served their entire sentences and those living in their home communities while completing a term of probation or parole. Our discussion is organized around three key issues relating to felon disenfranchisement: (1) the historical and legal origins of this practice; (2) its practical political impact on recent elections; and, (3) the racial dynamics that color both the history and contemporary effects of felon disenfranchisement in the United States. We discuss how felon disenfranchisement laws in many states appear to be out of step with both international practices and public opinion in the United States and consider contemporary policy proposals.

This chapter takes a look at class differences in political and social attitudes in the United States. The first section briefly describes some of the modern and classical controversies with regards to class differences in public opinion. Next, the chapter considers some of the definitional issues that have hindered work in this area, and offers some descriptive examples of variation in political and social attitudes across the different specifications of class. It ends with a summary of the current status of research, and possible directions that it may take in future.

Class voting in US presidential elections underwent a historic realignment (rather than dealignment) during the 1960s and 1970s. The middle class split their allegiance: professionals and routine white‐collar workers switched from supporting Republican candidates to backing the Democrats, while the self‐employed converted from fence‐sitting to strong Republican support. At the same time, the Democrats lost their former blue‐collar base. This chapter investigates the role of the demise of the trade unions during the realignment of class voting in the US. It concludes that the drop in union membership hurt Democratic candidates, but it does not explain the realignment of class voting in US presidential elections.

How does political ideology influence the ways individuals reason about immigrants? Analyzing data from a 2013 national survey, this study offers new perspective on the relevance of political ideology for understanding individuals’ willingness to accept immigrants. Liberals and conservatives show very different responses to the prospect of specific individuals or groups immigrating to the United States. These differences are large when experimental treatments cue Arabic and Hispanic names or symbolic threats. The authors discuss the benefits of incorporating ideology and extending the scope of established theory and research on immigrant acceptance.

We thank Melanie Zatarsky for research assistance, and the ASR referees, David Grusky, Michael Hout, Susan Thistle, and especially Brian Powell for their comments on an early version of this comment. COMMENT AND REPLY 469 SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW biology. He is the author (with Clem Brooks) of Social Cleavages and Political Change: Voter Alignments and U.S. Party Coalitions (Oxford University Press, 1999). Debbie Van Schyndel is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Sociology at Pennsylvania State University. Her primary areas of study are social theory, especially phenomenology, and its applications for sociology and political sociology.