Supreme Court accepts review in PLF’s First Amendment case!
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted PLF’s petition for certiorari in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, a First Amendment challenge to a Minnesota law that bans political apparel at the polling place. Minnesota interprets “political” broadly. Voters who wear shirts with any message that can possibly be associated with a political viewpoint face criminal sanctions and civil penalties. Under the State’s policy, it’s illegal to wear shirts that carry the logos of the Chamber of Commerce, AFL-CIO, NAACP, and many more. The law violates the First Amendment because it is facially overbroad. The Supreme Court has already held that the government is not allowed to ban all speech, and create virtual speech-free zones at places like airports. Here, Minnesota has created a speech-free zone at the polling place, and speech-free zones violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court will likely hear the case in the spring. You can read more about this case on our website.
The press conference is at 11am central time on Tuesday in Room 181, State Office Building, 100 Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, St. Paul, MN 55155.
learn more about
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky
The U.S. Supreme Court announced it will review our case challenging a Minnesota election law that literally strips free speech rights from the backs of voters. The law bans voters from wearing any “political” apparel at a polling place. This includes any t-shirt, button, or other items that could be construed as political, or even organizations that take political positions such as the AFL-CIO or NRA. Voters who don’t cover or remove the apparel could face prosecution and fines of up to $5,000. The high court will likely hear the case in the spring.Read more
What to read next
Arizona Supreme Court ignores voters’ intent in decision interpreting constitutional limitations on taxation
Last Friday, the Arizona Supreme Court issued its decision in Biggs v. Betlach, a case brought by a group of Arizona legislators challenging the imposition of a hospital charge to … ›
The Supreme Court announced that it will hear a First Amendment challenge to Minnesota’s sweeping, speech-stifling restrictions on what can be worn while voting. In this week’s episode of PLF’s Courting Liberty podcast, hear from case attorney Wen Fa and client Andy Cilek as they break down the importance and gravity of their fight for free speech.
ReasonTV released a new video that showcases our client Peggy Fontenot and her case against the Attorney General of Oklahoma. If you’ll recall, last year, Oklahoma enacted a new law that limits who may market art as American Indian-made.
Justice Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court endured the partisan gauntlet of the Senate hearing on his nomination to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The hearing only confirmed what has been known for some time: Justice Willett will serve the federal judiciary with integrity, wit, and commitment.
Earlier this year, the City of Seattle shocked the people of Washington—indeed, many across the nation—when it decided to impose an income tax on so-called “high-earners” in direct defiance of the Washington State Supreme Court, which has repeatedly held that the state constitution’s uniformity clause prohibits targeted income taxes.