Slashdot Mirror
Judge Refuses To Block New York 'Ballot Selfie' Law (reuters.com)
Last week, we wrote about a federal lawsuit that is challenging a New York state law that makes it a misdemeanor to show a marked election ballot to others. Today, we learn that a federal judge has refused to block enforcement of the law. Reuters reports: U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel in Manhattan said it would "wreak havoc on election-day logistics" to issue a preliminary injunction against the law, which prohibits the display of "ballot selfies." Three voters sued on Oct. 26 to block enforcement of the law, saying that sharing ballot selfies was a form of speech protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. But the judge said that because of the imminence of next Tuesday's election, the voters needed to show a "clear or substantial likelihood" that their lawsuit would succeed before he could issue an injunction, and that they had not done so. "The public's interest in orderly elections outweighs the plaintiffs' interest in taking and posting ballot selfies," though they remained free to express their political message through "other powerful means," Castel wrote. Leo Glickman, a lawyer for the voters, said in an interview his clients were disappointed by the ruling and do not plan to appeal it, but will keep pressing their case ahead of the 2017 election cycle. "People should be able to express themselves freely by photographing their marked ballots and putting them on social media feeds," he said, adding that state legislators have expressed interest in having the law repealed.
Reposting at the top level since nearly every other comment is getting this wrong...
Most (all?) jurisdictions allow a voter to request a replacement ballot, in the event of him making an error on the ballot. It would be trivial to take a ballot selfie with one ballot, request a replacement ballot, and vote differently.
This makes ballot selfies ineffective for vote-buying efforts.
The 1st Circuit Court court recognized that the NH law was unconstitutional because it bans protected political speech. NH's US Senator Ayotte is even planning to post her own ballot selfie, in violation of the NH law to prove the point.
NY is in the 2nd Circuit, so they will need their own decision until SCOTUS upholds the 1st Circuit decision.
Regardless, these bans aren't about vote buying - that won't work - they're about preventing people from expressing their political views on social media. Such postings have more benefit for insurgent candidates than establishment candidates, so the establishment is firmly against such efforts.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Not to mention Trump supporters committing voter fraud.
The story mentions 3 voter fraud suspects, but only gives details for one. I wonder if the other 2 were Shillary supporters. I guess voter fraud only news worthy if it's done by Republicans.