Judge refuses to block New York 'ballot selfie' law

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

U.S. | Thu Nov 3, 2016 | 5:26pm ED

Judge refuses to block New York 'ballot selfie' law

By Jonathan Stempel | NEW YORK

A federal judge on Thursday refused to block enforcement of a New York state law barring voters from taking photographs of their marked ballots so that they could post them on social media websites.

U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel in Manhattan said it would "wreak havoc on election-day logistics" to issue a preliminary injunction against the law, which prohibits the display of "ballot selfies."

Under the law, which dates from the 19th century, it is a misdemeanor for voters to share the contents of completed ballots. Violators could face up to one year in prison.

Three voters sued on Oct. 26 to block enforcement of the law, saying that sharing ballot selfies was a form of speech protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-selfie-new-york-idUSKBN12Y2MQ

[rickford66]

1. "refused", "block", "enforcement", "barring"

I had to read the first sentence a few times to understand it. Maybe I'm just tired.

[eppur_se_muova]

2. When I voted in MD in 2008, there was a sign prohibiting video cameras in the polling station ...

I thought that was strange, and asked one of the poll workers for the reason behind it. She told me that the state govt. had warned that some electronic devices could generate RFI which could affect the voting machines. I've never heard anything more about this, but it left me wondering ... if you could find a way to screw up the machines with a powerful RF signal, then all you would have to do would be to go into precincts known to vote the "wrong" way and scramble their votes. Even if you had no real control over the details, just by the law of averages you would tip the balance away from the favored candidate in whatever precincts you acted.

Just another reason to avoid electronic voting machines.