Ross, who was a candidate for the New Hampshire House of Representatives in the 2014 primary, voted in Manchester, New Hampshire. He took a photograph of his marked ballot, which reflected that candidates. I and, he voted for himself and other Republican He was aware of HB366's amendment to section 659:35, because of the law's publicize the ballot selfie. penalties, did not immediately More than a week later, on September 19, 2014, having learned that other voters were under investigation for violating section 659:35, I, Ross posted the ballot selfie on Facebook with a note reading: "Come at me, bro." Representative Horrigan, the legislator who had introduced the amendment to section 659:35, I, filed an election law complaint against Ross, which led to an investigation of Ross by the state Attorney General's Office. On October 31, 2014, the plaintiffs filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. The complaint sought a declaration invalidating section 659:35, I as unconstitutional on its face and as applied, and an injunction forbidding New Hampshire from enforcing the statute. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and agreed that no material facts are in dispute. In a thoughtful opinion, the district court determined that section 659:35, I is a content-based restriction on speech. Rideout, 123 F. Supp. 3d at 229. - 9 - The court observed that the

Seleccionar párrafo de destino3

Conectar a un párrafo
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Añadir a la tabla de contenidos