The 3 N's of the reentry law

In an ideal world, we would not consider a person's criminal record for employment purpose unless (1) a particular need exists, such as vulnerable population and/or sensitive information; (2) the criminal record indicates unfitness for the position; and (3) the finding of unfitness is not negated by evidence of rehabilitation. I call these 3 N's: need, nexus, and negation, respectively.

My argument is simple. If no particular need exists to consider a person's criminal record, why should we even ask that the person disclose his record? And, even if such a need exists because of the particular nature of the job, why do we want to know about the person's criminal history if it has nothing to do with the job? Finally, if the person can show that he is fully rehabilitated, why should we allow his past convictions to get in the way of his new life?

Over the past week in New York, Governor Paterson's reform of the Rockerfeller-era drug laws stirred up a fair amount of controversy for its impact on the nexus part of the equation. In short, the reform allows a judge to seal certain drug-related convictions and prevent an employer from even learning about them--no nexus, no check.

A recent op-ed piece in Daily News strongly criticized this aspect of Governor Paterson's reform, rhetorically asking:

How would you like a four-time convicted drug dealer to care for your grandmother in a nursing home?

Or an extortionist to handle your savings at the bank?

Or a burglar to teach your kids in school?

Or a car thief to watch your baby in day care?

You will notice that these scenarios all invoke the need factor--vulnerable populations such as the elderly and children, and sensitive information such as financial records. But you will also notice that these examples all lack the nexus factor.

What does drug dealing have to do with caring for the elderly in a nursing home? What does extortion have to with working at a bank? What does burglary have to do with teaching kids? And what does theft of automobile have to do with child care?

Nothing.

Unless you think that people with criminal records, no matter what their records, are likely to prey on the vulnerable population, whenever an opportunity for exploitation presents itself. But this is irrational fear, isn't it?