The United States Supreme Court said Minnesota’s ban on political clothing at polling places was too broad and vague.
SCOTUS Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.said:
“A shirt declaring ‘All Lives Matter,‘ we are told, could be ‘perceived’ as political. How about a shirt bearing the name of the National Rifle Association? Definitely out. That said, a shirt displaying a rainbow flag could be worn ‘unless there was an issue on the ballot’ that ‘related somehow . . . to gay rights.‘ A shirt simply displaying the text of the Second Amendment? Prohibited. But a shirt with the text of the First Amendment? ‘It would be allowed.‘ “
The author is a native of Minnesota. An opinion of a member or associate of The Loveshade Family does not necessarily reflect the views of the whole family.
One of the continuing problems with having laws that even the U.S. Supreme Court can’t agree on (I saw the vote was 7-2).
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.
The laws that a person must follow should not be more complex, obscure nor difficult than that person could reasonably know and follow.
That is such a good quote. If only we would follow that. It fits the Wiccan Rede.
As it harms done, do what thou wilt.
That should be the law of the land. But it isn’t.
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law” and the rest of it that’s often left off, “Love is the law, love under will.”
I wonder if they’d stop me if I wore than on a T-shirt.
The love part is often left out. Leave it to you to add it back.
And we should care why?
I would think people should know better than to wear political clothing to vote. If you aren’t sure, don’t wear it.
Screw Scotus!
You do realize they exist to keep politicians from taking over America?
whoah this blog is excellent i love reading your posts. Keep up the great work! You know, lots of people are hunting around for this info, you can aid them greatly.
I conceive this site has got some rattling fantastic info for everyone : D.