Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateMississippiIn Committee
HB 4168: Suffrage; restore to John Neskoroscheny of Hinds County.
Fabian Nelson
HB 4168 status: In Committee — Died In Committee (updated Apr 15, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
65OUT OF 100
Score:65/100 civic fit
Risk:Low Risk
Impact:Low Impact 10/100
Constitutionality80%
Bipartisan50%
Public opinion50%
Bill summary
What changes
The bill proposed to restore voting rights to an individual named John Neskoroscheny in Hinds County.
Who is affected
John Neskoroscheny of Hinds County.
Requirements and enforcement
The bill required legislative approval to bypass standard suffrage restoration procedures.
Costs and funding
Not stated in the available source.
When it takes effect
The bill was active during the 2026 session; it has since died in committee.
Potential benefits
If passed, the beneficiary would regain the right to vote in local and state elections.
Risks and tradeoffs
The bill relies on the individual legislative process rather than a systematic, equitable policy for all similarly situated citizens.
What is still unknown
The exact reason for the initial loss of suffrage and the specific criteria the legislature uses to select individuals for these private bills are unknown.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Society
Positive outlook
70%
Benefits
- Restores franchise to a specific citizen
- Supports individual social reintegration
- Promotes broader democratic participation
Risks
- Ad-hoc process vs systematic reform
- Limited scope of impact
- Reliance on legislative favor for rights
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Positive outlook
60%
Benefits
- Formal transparency in rights restoration
- Use of established legislative processes
- Public record of individual suffrage
Risks
- Administrative inefficiency of private bills
- Lack of public accessibility for general voters
- Informal standards for case review
Public Health & Safety
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
Evidence is limited to a single-sentence legislative summary.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a summary; full text not available.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeCurrent
- Chamber votesUpcoming
- Final agreementUpcoming
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.