Can we agree? Episode 7

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Do you agree with the SC ruling?

Yes
9
90%
No
1
10%
 
Total votes : 10

Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Zarniwoop » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:26 pm

I just posted this in the SC thread.

But Minnesota had a law that said that you can't wear any political attire or symbols when voting because it might put undue influence on others around you. They tried to restrict a guy from wearing a "Don't Tread on Me" t-shirt because they thought it aligned with the Conservative platform and was trying to influence others. So basically this law could ban anything that was associated with politics in general.

Here are some excerpts from an article:


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 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. Banning voters from wearing First Amendment t-shirts would certainly seem to qualify as an overly broad restriction on freedom of speech.

In his ruling today, the chief justice stressed that constitutional failing. "Would a 'Support Our Troops' shirt be banned, if one of the candidates or parties had expressed a view on military funding or aid for veterans?" Roberts wrote. "What about a #MeToo shirt, referencing the movement to increase awareness of sexual harassment and assault? At oral argument, the State indicated that the ban would cover such an item if a candidate had 'brought up' the topic."



Here is an entire article if so interested in reading: http://reason.com/blog/2018/06/14/scotu ... ni#comment




So this week's question...do you agree with the SC ruling? (It was 7 - 2) Or would you liked to have seen the law stay in place?
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 247 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby beardmcdoug » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:29 pm

gtfo with that law. what a load of ****. good for the court. my only question is, who are the 2 morons that voted "keep it".

edit: oh, they wanted it to not be a federal ruling and instead wanted it to go down to the minnesota court level. I guess I get that.
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 197 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby DreadNaught » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:37 pm

That law was complete nonsense and the examples brought up in SC cited in the OP is all any reasonable person should need to know. So Yes I agree with the SC here and shame on whatever 2 Justices voted to keep the law in place.

Now if we're talking about the workers and volunteers at the these polling stations than I'd agree that political attire not be permitted. But I believe that is already the case. I know it is at certain polling places in Tampa. My mother-in-law is retired but still volunteers during election time to help out at our local voting precinct and she has said that they are told/advised not wear anything that can construed as political and that solid clothes with no text is preferred.
Last edited by DreadNaught on Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 11718
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 479 times
Been thanked: 502 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Zarniwoop » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:39 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
Now if we're talking about the workers and volunteers at the these polling stations than I'd agree that political attire not be permitted.



I would agree.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 247 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Buc2 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:56 pm

Another common sense ruling. I agree with their ruling.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 9935
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 845 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Cheb » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:26 pm

DreadNaught wrote:That law was complete nonsense and the examples brought up in SC cited in the OP is all any reasonable person should need to know. So Yes I agree with the SC here and shame on whatever 2 Justices voted to keep the law in place.

Now if we're talking about the workers and volunteers at the these polling stations than I'd agree that political attire not be permitted. But I believe that is already the case. I know it is at certain polling places in Tampa. My mother-in-law is retired but still volunteers during election time to help out at our local voting precinct and she has said that they are told/advised not wear anything that can construed as political and that solid clothes with no text is preferred.


I agree with you on both counts. John and Jane Doe can wear what they like when they cast their vote, but those working the polling stations should at least have some semblance of apolitical neutrality, lest someone cry out suppression/intimidation.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby MJW » Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:14 am

Cheb wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:That law was complete nonsense and the examples brought up in SC cited in the OP is all any reasonable person should need to know. So Yes I agree with the SC here and shame on whatever 2 Justices voted to keep the law in place.

Now if we're talking about the workers and volunteers at the these polling stations than I'd agree that political attire not be permitted. But I believe that is already the case. I know it is at certain polling places in Tampa. My mother-in-law is retired but still volunteers during election time to help out at our local voting precinct and she has said that they are told/advised not wear anything that can construed as political and that solid clothes with no text is preferred.


I agree with you on both counts. John and Jane Doe can wear what they like when they cast their vote, but those working the polling stations should at least have some semblance of apolitical neutrality, lest someone cry out suppression/intimidation.


Agreed. Wearing what you want to the polls is pretty much fundamental 1A type stuff. I've never done it, but I've certainly seen other people do it. Strangely, it hasn't actually influenced my vote in any way!

By the same token, if you vote for Candidate A, and the person taking your ballot is covered in Candidate B swag, I'm going to be wondering if my vote might "get lost." That's a bad look for the process.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8303
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Jun 15, 2018 7:00 am

I like to wear my assless chaps when I vote.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 12063
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 124 times
Been thanked: 593 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Buc2 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:06 am

At least someone likes it I guess.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 9935
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 845 times
Been thanked: 322 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:29 pm

Anyone want to volunteer for doing this weeks?
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 247 times

Re: Can we agree? Episode 7

Postby mightyleemoon » Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:52 am

I just assume politicians are attempting to become caricatures at this point. This bit of legislation only underlines that for me.
User avatar
mightyleemoon
 
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:35 pm
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 189 times


post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PanteraCanes and 6 guests