By Carolina Journal Staff
- The Libertarian voter challenging North Carolina’s ban on ballot selfies seeks a ruling from a federal judge by Oct. 29.
- Susan Hogarth’s lawyers filed a motion Tuesday seeking a hearing on her requested injunction by Oct. 15.
- North Carolina is one of 14 states that ban ballot selfies.
The Libertarian voter suing in federal court over North Carolina’s ban on ballot selfies seeks an injunction in the case by Oct. 29. That would ensure voters who head to the polls on Election Day in November would be free from legal penalty for taking photos of their ballots.
Susan Hogarth’s lawyers filed a motion Tuesday in US District Court to expedite consideration of her requested injunction. Hogarth is working with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression to challenge the state’s ballot selfie ban.
“After taking a picture of herself with her completed March 2024 primary ballot and sharing it on social media, Hogarth received a letter from the North Carolina State Board of Elections demanding she take down her ballot selfie and threatening her with criminal prosecution,” Hogarth’s lawyers wrote. “This November, Hogarth plans to exercise her First Amendment right to take and share a photo of herself in the voting booth with her completed ballot and has a particular interest in doing so because she herself will appear as a candidate.”
Hogarth is the Libertarian candidate in state Senate District 13. She faces Democratic Sen. Lisa Grafstein and Republican candidate Scott Lassiter.
“Hogarth and other voters must know in advance of the election whether they will face the threat of prosecution for taking a ballot selfie,” he lawyers wrote. “This is particularly true for those voting via absentee ballot, as they must mail their ballots in time to be received on Election Day.”
Hogarth asks for a hearing on the injunction no later than Oct. 15 and a ruling from US District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan no later than Oct. 29.
Ballot selfies are illegal in 14 states, including North Carolina. The state ban includes taking a photo with a ballot at an election site and an absentee ballot at home. Breaking the state law can lead to a misdemeanor charge under North Carolina General Statute 163-166.3(c).
Susan Hogarth voted in the Libertarian Party primary in March and shared an image on X/Twitter with a caption criticizing the law.
Despite the threat of possible jail time and fines, Hogarth refused to comply with the State Board of Elections’ order, arguing that people “should be able to show the world how you voted without fear of punishment” in a free society.
“Instead, with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), today she’s suing members of the state board and Wake County Board of Elections to have the unconstitutional statutes struck down as they apply to ballot selfies,” FIRE said in a news release.
One in 10 American adults — roughly 26 million people — have taken a ballot selfie at some point in their lives, according to the FIRE release,
“The burden is on North Carolina to prove it has a good reason to ban ballot selfies and that this is the only way to do it,” said FIRE attorney Daniel Ortner. “The First Amendment protects the millions of voters who are proud to show the world that they actually voted for the people and policies they care about.”
The lawsuit asks the court to declare ballot selfies are protected expression under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
The suit states that Hogarth has not removed her March 5 post and has no plans to do so. In fact, she plans to share another photo when she votes this fall.
According to the NCSBE website, voters are allowed to have phones or electronic devices with them while voting as long as those devices are not used to photograph or video a ballot.
“Photographing a marked ballot is illegal in part because such photographs could be used as proof of a vote for a candidate in a vote-buying scheme,” the website states.
When Hogarth filed suit, the State Board of Elections said it could not comment on pending litigation but noted it is required to “investigate when necessary or advisable, the administration of elections laws, frauds, and irregularities in elections.”
