Slashdot Mirror


Lawsuit Seeks To Block New York Ban On 'Ballot Selfies' (msnbc.com)

You have have the right to vote, but should you have the right to take a selfie at a ballot? According to ABC News, a federal lawsuit is challenging a New York state law that makes it a misdemeanor to show a marked election ballot to others: The lawsuit filed late Wednesday in Manhattan federal court seeks to have the law banning so-called "ballot selfies" declared unconstitutional. The lawsuit says publishing a voted ballot on social media can be a powerful form of political expression. It says that someone claiming they voted without photographic proof reduces the credibility of the individual. Attorney Leo Glickman, who filed the suit on behalf of three voters, says the lawsuit is consistent with claims made in Michigan, Indiana and New Hampshire, where similar laws have been struck down. In a separate report, Mother Jones' Kevin Drum explained the reasoning behind why a law against "ballot selfies" would exist in the first place: Just for the record, then, there is a reason for selfie bans in voting booths: it prevents vote buying. After all, the only way it makes sense to pay people for their votes is if you have proof that they voted the way you told them to. Back in the day that was no problem, but ever since secret ballots became the norm vote buying has died out. Selfies change all that. If I give you ten bucks to vote for my favorite candidate for mayor, I can withhold payment until you show me a selfie proving that you voted for my guy.

6 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. In Texas by will_die · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Texas they came out and said the reason was for the privacy of others. You have no right taking pictures of others in the voting place be it directly or in the background so they are not allowed within 100 meters of the voting area. Since you cannot have a camera in the area there is no camera in the privacy of the booth.

  2. Re:I wanted to take a photo of my ballot by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. USPS loses about 3% of all letters. Would you be willing to take a 3% risk that your vote is never received?

    I call BS. If the rate were that high, all USPS customers would be up in arms, demanding improvements.

    And furthermore, you're conflating letters that are truly lost or destroyed (a very tiny percentage) with those that are undeliverable because they are improperly addressed. That's unlikely to happen with a mail-in ballot that is mailed in an official pre-addressed envelope.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  3. Another way to avoid vote buying/coercion by presidenteloco · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Allow Internet voting, with the following modification.

    Authenticated voter can vote any number of times over a period of one month. Only a hash of their identity is stored with each ballot.

    Authenticated voter can come back to the system at any time during the month, and either vote again, or select which ballot, by date and time submitted they wish to be counted as their real vote. If they don't specify, then either their first vote, or their last vote is counted, depending on a setting they can secretly pre-set before the election.

    So the vote buyer or asshole husband has no way of knowing which vote of the person was counted, short of imprisoning them for the whole month.
    People who get imprisoned for a month to control their vote have much bigger problems than the right to vote freely. They need to escape and contact the police.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  4. Vote-flipping Evidence by os2fan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are already a lot of videos circulating that show vote-flipping, where you vote for A, but the machine records B. Making selfies illegal would make the evidence that this has happeened inadmissable in court.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    1. Re:Vote-flipping Evidence by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are already a lot of videos circulating that show vote-flipping, where you vote for A, but the machine records B. Making selfies illegal would make the evidence that this has happeened inadmissable in court.

      Are you a cop by any chance? Because you do not understand the rules of evidence. Evidence gathered by a citizen during the commission of a crime is still admissible in court. It's evidence gathered by a police officer that isn't.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Re:They are publicly buying votes in Pike County, by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can not do it, if the vote is anonymous. That is the real danger, that stupid selfie thing is a direct threat against democracy. Allow selfies and you allow selfies to be forced. Vote the way you are told to or else and I want to see the selfie. How many freaks would force that on their family members or on others. Get caught taking a selfie vote and you should spend a week behind bars. The threat against democracy is extreme and should be punished.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen