Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky Oral Argument
2018-03-05T21:37:20-05:00https://ximage.c-spanvideo.org/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwaWN0dXJlcy5jLXNwYW52aWRlby5vcmciLCJrZXkiOiJGaWxlc1wvNWNkXC8yMDE4MDMwNTIxMzc1MDAwMV9oZC5qcGciLCJlZGl0cyI6eyJyZXNpemUiOnsiZml0IjoiY292ZXIiLCJoZWlnaHQiOjUwNn19fQ==The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, a case concerning whether a Minnesota Election Day law violates a person’s First Amendment free speech rights. According to the law, voters near or in a polling place are prohibited from wearing political badges, buttons, or insignia on Election Day to cast a ballot. The case dates back to 2010 when three conservative groups filed suit. They wore buttons that read “Please ID me,” and one wore a tea party logo shirt with the words “Don’t tread on me” to polling places on Election Day. One of those voters was Andrew Cilek, the executive director of the Minnesota Voters Alliance. An election official stopped him, and he was initially prevented from voting.
On June 14, 2018, the Court ruled 7-2 that Minnesota’s law is too vague and violates First Amendment free speech rights.
On June 14, 2018, the Court ruled 7-2 that Minnesota’s law is too vague and violates First Amendment free speech rights.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, a case concerning whether a Minnesota Election Day law violates a person’s First Amendment free… read more
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, a case concerning whether a Minnesota Election Day law violates a person’s First Amendment free speech rights. According to the law, voters near or in a polling place are prohibited from wearing political badges, buttons, or insignia on Election Day to cast a ballot. The case dates back to 2010 when three conservative groups filed suit. They wore buttons that read “Please ID me,” and one wore a tea party logo shirt with the words “Don’t tread on me” to polling places on Election Day. One of those voters was Andrew Cilek, the executive director of the Minnesota Voters Alliance. An election official stopped him, and he was initially prevented from voting.
On June 14, 2018, the Court ruled 7-2 that Minnesota’s law is too vague and violates First Amendment free speech rights. close
People in this video
-
-
David Breemer Attorney
-
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg Associate Justice U.S. Supreme Court
-
-
- Anthony M. Kennedy Associate Justice U.S. Supreme Court
-
-
-
Hosting Organization
Purchase a Download
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky Oral Argument
-
MP4 video - Standard
- Price:
- $6.99
-
MP3 audio - Standard
- Price:
- $0.99
Related Video
-
McCoy v. Louisiana Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in McCoy v. Louisiana. The case concerns whether a death row inmate’s Sixth Amendment…
-
Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31 Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31…
-
United States v. Microsoft Corporation Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in United States v. Microsoft Corporation, a case dealing with warrant compliance…
-
NIFLA v. Becerra Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) v. Becerra, a case concerning California’s abortion…
User Created Clips from This Video
-
- 3 minutes
- 27 views
-
- 30 seconds
- 2 views