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