LYNCH, Circuit Judge. In 2014, New Hampshire amended a statute meant to avoid vote buying and voter intimidation by newly forbidding citizens from photographing their marked ballots and publicizing such photographs. While the photographs need not show the voter, they often do and are commonly referred to as "ballot selfies." The statute imposes a fine of up to $1,000 for a violation of the prohibition. See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 659:35, IV; id. § 651:2, IV(a). Three New Hampshire citizens who are under investigation for violation of the revised statute, and who are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, challenged the statute's constitutionality. The district court held that the statute is a content-based restriction of speech that on its face violates the First Amendment. 3d 218, 221 (D.N.H. 2015). Rideout v. Gardner, 123 F. Supp. The New Hampshire Secretary of State appeals, arguing that the statute is justified as a prophylactic measure to prevent new technology from facilitating future vote buying and voter coercion. We affirm on the narrower ground that the statute as amended fails to meet the test for intermediate scrutiny under the First Amendment and that the statute's purposes cannot justify the restrictions it imposes on speech. I. In the late nineteenth century, political parties, unions, and other organizations had the power to print their own - 3 -

اختر الفقرة المستهدفة3

الاتصال بفقرة
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
أضف إلى جدول المحتويات