Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, No. 15-1682 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs filed suit against the Minnesota Secretary of State and others, challenging a statute prohibiting the wearing of political insignia at a polling place, Minnesota Statute 211B.11. This court reversed the dismissal of plaintiffs' as-applied First Amendment claim in Minnesota Majority v. Mansky, 708 F.3d 1051, 1059 (8th Cir. 2013). The district court, on remand, granted summary judgment for defendants. The court concluded that the statute and Policy are viewpoint neutral and facially reasonable. The court noted that the statute and Policy prohibit more than election-related apparel. The court explained that, even if Tea Party apparel was not election-related, it was not unreasonable to prohibit it in a polling place. In order to ensure a neutral, influence-free polling place, all political material was banned. In this case, EIW offered nothing to rebut evidence that the Tea Party has recognizable political views. The court concluded that the district court properly granted summary judgment because no reasonable trier of fact could conclude that the statute and Policy as applied to EIW violated its First Amendment rights. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Benton, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Loken, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Minnesota Election Laws. Several organizations and individuals challenge Minnesota Statute Section 211B.11 which prohibits the wearing of political insignia at a polling place. For the court's earlier opinion reversing dismissal of the groups' as-applied First Amendment claim, see Minnesota Majority v. Mansky, 708 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 2013). The statute and the state's policy implementing it are viewpoint neutral and facially reasonable,and application of the policy to persons wearing Tea Party apparel was reasonable because the Tea party has recognizable political views; defendants' summary judgment on plaintiffs' First Amendment claims is affirmed.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on August 3, 2018.
Subsequent History
- Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, No. 16-1435 (U.S. Jun. 14, 2018)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.