Started Feb 28, 2018 06:00PM UTC   •   Closed Jun 14, 2018 05:00PM UTC (4 months ago)

SCOTUSblog asks

In Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, will the Supreme Court rule that the state's ban on political apparel at polling places is facially unconstitutional?

Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled that Minnesota Statute ¤ 211B.11, banning political apparel at the polling place, did not violate the federal constitution (SCOTUS Blog, The Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota). Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, asserting that the law violates First Amendment protections for free speech. A Supreme Court ruling that the state's ban on political apparel at polling places is as-applied unconstitutional will not count. For more information on what constitutes a "facial" challenge like the one in this case, as opposed to an "as-applied" challenge, see here. The Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision in its current term, but if it does not, the question will resolve as no.

Confused? Check our FAQ or ask us for help.


In Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, the Supreme Court ruled that the state's ban on political apparel at polling places is facially unconstitutional (Minnesota vs. Mansky, SCOTUSBlog). This question closed as "yes" with an end date of 14 June 2018.

Tags
Challenges
Answer was correct

Most Accurate

Accuracy Score

1.
-0.288
4.
-0.287
5.
-0.287