Recently, I received a message from someone I’ll call Blake. It was raw, honest, and painfully familiar to so many people who carry old felonies like an invisible brand.
My felony history is more than 15 years old but still appears during background checks. I keep seeing these two questions on job applications:
1. Are you legally eligible to work in the U.S.? Y/N
2. Can you pass a background screening/check? Y/N
If I’m eligible to work, what gives? There’s no ‘pass/fail’ on a background check. And why are they asking about sealed juvenile records?“
This isn’t just Blake’s frustration; it’s a system-level contradiction that keeps thousands of people in a cycle of joblessness, poverty, and stigma long after they’ve paid their debt.
The Double Standard: You’re Legal to Work… But “Not Really”?
When employers ask “Are you legally eligible to work?”, they’re confirming citizenship or work authorization.
That should be the end of story for a lot of jobs.
But then comes the second gate: “Can you pass a background screening?”
What does that mean, exactly?
Too often, it means a “yes” or “no” checkbox that lumps every kind of record together; misunderstood convictions, decades-old records mixed with recent ones, adult charges with juvenile records that are supposed to be sealed.
The result? A “fail” for millions of people who are, by every legal standard, eligible to work, but blocked by broad, one-size-fits-all “screening” rules.
When the Rules Make No Sense
Blake points out the obvious: common-sense exclusions make sense in very specific contexts. There’s some common sense involved around hiring and convictions and future employment, such as a former drug trafficker operating a pharmacy; probably not going to happen. But specific, rational limitations can easily become weaponized into blanket bans.
Worse yet, some employers still ask about sealed juvenile records; a practice that flies in the face of basic fairness and, in many cases, state law.
The Real Cost: A Permanent Sentence Without a Trial
Old felonies shouldn’t be a life sentence to unemployment. Research shows that steady work is the single biggest factor in preventing recidivism, yet the system shuts people out of the very thing that makes our communities safer.
Blake’s felony is over 15 years old. He’s eligible. He’s motivated. But the system still says: “Not good enough.”
What sense does that make?
What Needs to Change? A Lot.
Ban the box… for real. Many states have passed “ban the box” laws, but employers find workarounds. We need enforcement and consequences for biased companies who circumvent the guardrails.
Narrow background checks to relevant, recent convictions. Context matters. If we document conviction, we need to document rehabilitative efforts, too.
Protect sealed juvenile records. Asking about them should be illegal and enforceable.
Tell the truth about what a background check is. It’s not “pass/fail”; it’s information. The law should limit how that information is used.
Employers need better education on fair hiring and accountability when they break the rules.
My Dear Friend, If You’re Reading This…
You’re not alone. You shouldn’t have to carry this burden in silence. Your courage to put this out there, even privately, is exactly how change starts.
Let’s stop punishing people for trying to do better. Being eligible to work should actually mean you get to work.
If you’ve got a story like Blake’s, I want to hear it. You can even share it anonymously if you need to. The more we shine a light on these contradictions, the closer we get to real, common-sense reform.
Have a story like Blake’s? Share it with Clutch Justice at hello@clutchjustice.com
