October Term 2017 · Docket 16-1435
Can states ban political apparel in polling places?
Minnesota Voters Alliance argues the state law violates free speech. The state claims it protects voting rights.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Breemer argued the law bans conventional political expression.
Mr. Rogan argued the restriction protects the fundamental right to vote.
questions_asked_by_justices
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 53-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 53-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Minnesota law bans political apparel in polling places. The state says this prevents coercion. Voters argue this bans protected speech.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 28, 2018.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-51
What each side wants
Voters want the law struck down as unconstitutional.
The state wants the law upheld as valid.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
What each side says
Voters claim the law bans all political apparel.
The state claims the restriction is viewpoint-neutral.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
What the justices asked
Justice Kagan asked if a statute could target only electoral speech.
Justice Sotomayor noted Burson said the opposite of the argument.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 53-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 53-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of speech in voting areas. It balances free expression against the integrity of the ballot.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 53-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 53-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 7-29 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 7-29
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.