EDITORIAL: Supreme Court backs First Amendment in polling place case

The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the First Amendment on Thursday in a case involving what voters may wear when they enter a polling place.

In a 7-2 decision, the justices held that Minnesota went overboard in prohibiting voters from sporting a “political badge, political button or other political insignia” when they turn out to cast a ballot.

The case involved Andrew Cilek, an activist who wore a tea party T-shirt and a button reading “Please I.D. Me” when he voted in 2010. He was turned away from the polling place because of his attire but was eventually allowed to vote.

The majority backed Mr. Cilek, holding that the statute was too broad. That’s an understatement. The law was a hot mess.

The word “political” can mean virtually anything, especially in these tumultuous times. During oral arguments, lawyers for the state were unable to mount a coherent defense of the law. A shirt bearing the text of the Second Amendment? That would be illegal, they said. What about the text of the First Amendment? That’s fine, they argued. Meanwhile, an NRA T-shirt was a no-no, but a shirt featuring a rainbow flag was OK — unless there was a question on the ballot related to gay rights.

The decision noted that the court wasn’t averse to reasonable restrictions against electioneering at polling places. Nevada, for instance, prohibits soliciting votes or campaigning for a candidate, party or ballot question within 100 feet of a polling place. But Minnesota’s law went way too far in regulating speech and expression while empowering election volunteers to play fashion police.

Even well-intentioned laws intended to minimize disruptions at polling places must take into consideration the First Amendment’s free speech protections.