General Category > Editorial/Opinion/Blogs

SCOTUS Rules 7-2 Against State Law Banning 'Political' Attire at Polling Places

(1/1)

EasyAce:
A big win for First Amendment advocates in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky
By Damon Root
http://reason.com/blog/2018/06/14/scotus-rules-7-2-against-state-law-banni


--- Quote ---Today the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a sweeping Minnesota law that banned voters from wearing "political" badges, button, insignia, or attire inside polling places on election day. The ban applied to all apparel "designed to influence and impact voting" or "promoting a group with recognizable political views." According to the majority opinion of Chief Justice John Roberts, "the First Amendment prohibits laws 'abridging the freedom of speech.' Minnesota's ban on wearing any 'political badge, political button, or other political insignia' plainly restricts a form of expression within the protection of the First Amendment."

The case is Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky. It originated in 2010 when Andrew Cilek, the executive director of the conservative group Minnesota Voters Alliance, tried to vote while wearing a t-shirt adorned with an image of the Gadsen Flag, the phrase "Don't Tread on Me," and a Tea Party Patriots logo. Cilek was also wearing a "Please I.D. Me" button from the conservative group Election Integrity Watch.

In other words, this case asked whether or not a state government may ban voters from wearing "Don't Tread on Me" t-shirts at the polls. By a vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment trumps the state law.

Chief Justice Roberts' majority opinion was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito, and Elena Kagan . . .

. . . The law's demise comes as no surprise to me. During the February 28 oral arguments, the lawyer representing Minnesota elections official Joe Mansky admitted that the state could even ban voters from wearing t-shirts that feature nothing else but the text of the Second Amendment. His reasoning? The amendment's language "could be viewed as political."

"How about the First Amendment?" asked Justice Samuel Alito, prompting laughter in the courtroom. The law's fate was pretty much sealed at that point . . .
--- End quote ---

driftdiver:
How about this one?

EasyAce:

--- Quote from: driftdiver on June 14, 2018, 06:23:43 pm ---How about this one?



--- End quote ---
I would assume that mural existed even before that polling place was set up. (I assume it was in a school, perhaps a school project.) And it doesn't bother me, whatever I thought (and still think) of His Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, COD, RIP, LSMFT, Would-Have-Been Life President of the Republic Formerly Known as the United States, even if I think schools encouraging projects that bend a virtual knee before a president is untoward. The presence of murals, T-shirts, buttons, banners, posters, et. al. at a polling place doesn't exactly oblige me to heed them or obey them when I cast a vote. I still have memories of my elementary school being a polling place in 1964 and of assorted kids and their parents hoisting posters on sticks chanting on behalf of either Lyndon Johnson or Barry Goldwater, and nobody cringing or crying foul over it---or necessarily changing their minds or their intended votes one or the other way because of it.

INVAR:
This will be fun now.  Electioneering at Polling Places is coming back in vogue again!  And it's LEGAL!

I can see this ruling morphing into organized protests at polling places to intimate voters in the future.

Free Vulcan:

--- Quote --- During the February 28 oral arguments, the lawyer representing Minnesota elections official Joe Mansky admitted that the state could even ban voters from wearing t-shirts that feature nothing else but the text of the Second Amendment. His reasoning? The amendment's language "could be viewed as political."

"How about the First Amendment?" asked Justice Samuel Alito, prompting laughter in the courtroom. The law's fate was pretty much sealed at that point. Banning voters from wearing First Amendment t-shirts would certainly seem to qualify as an overly broad restriction on freedom of speech.
--- End quote ---

Well played you Honor, well played.

The law was overly broad. Minnesota screwed up, and it got slapped down.

Navigation

[0] Message Index