The following editorial appeared Thursday in the Everett Herald.

If you do the crime, you should do the time – and pay the fine.

But according to a ruling last week by a King County Superior Court judge, just doing the time is enough for felons to get their voting rights restored in Washington. Judge Michael Spearman said a state law requiring felons to pay all fines and court-ordered restitution before they can vote violates the U.S. and state constitutions.

Fortunately, Secretary of State Sam Reed, the state’s top elections officer, and Attorney General Rob McKenna are appealing, arguing that the state has a legitimate interest in suspending felons’ voting rights until they have completely paid their debt to society.

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in 2004 on behalf of three indigent felons who were only able to make small payments toward court-order fees. They argued that the continued denial of their voting rights amounted to discrimination, because wealthier felons could have their rights restored sooner. Spearman agreed, writing that “discrimination on the basis of wealth and property has long been disfavored.”

Spearman’s ruling seemed to raise the specter of the poll tax, a particularly revolting part of U.S. history in which some states taxed voters in an effort to keep African Americans and Native Americans from voting. But this isn’t the same thing. It isn’t even close.

These are felons we’re talking about. They chose to break the law. Sorry, but there’s a price to pay for that. And this ruling doesn’t just apply to fines paid to the state – it includes court-ordered restitution to a criminal’s innocent victims. Who is looking out for their interests?

And why shouldn’t states have the right to decide what constitutes full payment of a felon’s debt to society, including the restoration of voting rights? In Washington and other states, prisons are already packed. Using fines and restitution in felony sentencing is good public policy because it offers a rational alternative to long, costly prison sentences.

That’s why Reed and McKenna were right to appeal. A ruling this broad – affecting voting rights, crime victims’ rights and states’ rights – should be decided at a higher level.

The right to vote is sacred in a democracy. It’s the ultimate exercise in citizenship. But when you step outside the law, you risk forfeiting it. Felons who object to that should have considered the consequences before they did their crime.