[EL] Ballot Selfies, Voter Integrity and New Technology

[Bill Maurer]

That seems sensible. I would think that whatever the legitimate concerns that gave rise to these laws, the simple fact that technology has given millions of people the ability to easily photograph their ballot means that their continued existence exposes a vast number of people to unknowingly violating a law of which they were completely unaware. I don’t think the people that passed these laws were trying to turn thousands of people into inadvertent criminals.

Bill

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Greenberg, Kevin<mailto:Kevin.Greenberg at flastergreenberg.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 4:50 PM
To: 'Steve Klein'<mailto:stephen.klein.esq at gmail.com>; law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Ballot Selfies, Voter Integrity and New Technology

Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State about two weeks ago issued guidance that ballot selfies are allowed as a First Amendment expression and, essentially, do not violate the anti-coercion statute so long as they are posted after the ballot is voted.

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Klein
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2016 1:41 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Ballot Selfies, Voter Integrity and New Technology

Viral Video of Son Joking He’s Not Voting for Clinton Prompts Mom to Ask for Ballot Selfie to Prove How He Voted
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88304>Posted on October 30, 2016 9:33 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88304> by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>Yeah, it’s funny.
<https://twitter.com/xxxjayglo/status/792039225877299200>But it’s not. Ballot selfies can facilitate coercion, not just vote buying<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88276>.

I argued in our briefing in the Western District of Michigan that the same new technology that allows for easy ballot selfies also allows citizens to now catch much of the subtle coercion that so concerned the Supreme Court in Burson.

This video is funny, in part, because it’s an open recording, but most states (including Michigan) allow for secret recording with single-party consent (that is, you can secretly record your own conversations). Audio recording from an iPhone of subtle coercion may not rise to the level of overt threats or vote-buy offers to make a solid legal case, but it’s certainly a chance for average citizens to protect themselves by going to the press or, just maybe, provide some real evidence that ballot selfies are just too dangerous to voting integrity.

But a simple search of social media platforms, even from users in states where ballot selfies are illegal, is bound to show a whole lot of ballot selfies next week. They will implicate nothing other than electoral advocacy and civic pride.

--
Steve Klein
Attorney*
Pillar of Law Institute
www.pillaroflaw.org<http://www.pillaroflaw.org>

*Licensed to practice law in Illinois and Michigan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161031/147291da/attachment.html>