ClydeR
08-18-2015, 09:00 PM
Buying votes has always been a tricky thing, because you really need proof that the person you're paying -- probably in the form of a bottle of liquor -- actually voted the way you wanted them to. Making things easier, a federal judge says that the First Amendment guaranties the right of every voter to document how they actually voted.
In 2014, New Hampshire made it a criminal offense to take a digital image or photograph of a marked ballot and share the image on social media. The supposed justification for the law was a fear that ballot selfies would make it easier to bribe or bully voters to back a particular candidate.
The law was challenged by several voters, including a man who wrote in the name of his dog on a U.S. Senate ballot and posted the image on Facebook along with the explanation that “all of the candidates SUCK.”
In striking down the measure, U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro said that the ban on ballot selfies deprived citizens of “their most powerful means of letting the world know how they voted.” As for the danger of vote-buying or coercion, the judge said the record contained no evidence of such corruption “since the late 1800s.”
More... (http://www.pressherald.com/2015/08/18/another-view-judge-ballot-selfies-may-be-undignified-but-they-are-legal/)
In 2014, New Hampshire made it a criminal offense to take a digital image or photograph of a marked ballot and share the image on social media. The supposed justification for the law was a fear that ballot selfies would make it easier to bribe or bully voters to back a particular candidate.
The law was challenged by several voters, including a man who wrote in the name of his dog on a U.S. Senate ballot and posted the image on Facebook along with the explanation that “all of the candidates SUCK.”
In striking down the measure, U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro said that the ban on ballot selfies deprived citizens of “their most powerful means of letting the world know how they voted.” As for the danger of vote-buying or coercion, the judge said the record contained no evidence of such corruption “since the late 1800s.”
More... (http://www.pressherald.com/2015/08/18/another-view-judge-ballot-selfies-may-be-undignified-but-they-are-legal/)