From Justice Terrence Berg’s election day opinion ACLU of Michigan vs. 1-6:
The ACLU alleges that the defendants are actively engaged in efforts to intimidate, intimidate, harass, and prevent voter participation in the 2024 election. The ACLU filed four affidavits of support from Michigan residents.
Raimi served as a poll watcher at four different locations on election day. At a polling station at Derby Junior High School in Birmingham, Raimi witnessed three men with cameras filming people entering and leaving the polling station. One of them wore a baseball cap that read, “Don’t worry, I’m an asshole. My rights don’t stop where your feelings begin.” The other two were said to be wearing “patriotic” shirts. Mr. Raimi told them they could not film people entering and leaving the polling place, but they responded that it was their First Amendment right to do so.
Others handing out leaflets near the polling station told Raimi that three men blocked the family from leaving the polling station, even though the family had asked them not to record themselves. . At a polling place at Oakland Schools Technical Campus Southeast in Royal Oak, Michigan, Raimi saw one of the same three men he was filming. The man was now wearing gaiters covering his nose and mouth and was accompanied by three other individuals who appeared to be intimidating Raimi. Raimi suggested that each person had a camera and was filming the polling place.
Police supervisors told the men not to film, but the men reiterated that it was their First Amendment right to record. Mr. Raimi told them not to do the same and received the same reaction. Police arrived and the individuals left after 10 to 15 minutes, but two continued to film the police as they left. Raimi believes these people were part of a coordinated effort to elicit negative and angry reactions from poll workers and voters, and record those reactions on video. …
Ago also admitted to voting at the Oakland Schools Technical Campus in Royal Oak, Michigan, on November 5, 2024, around 2 p.m. When they arrived, they observed two men and a woman using cellphones to record voters. The men were wearing masks that covered from the nose down. Ago testified that he heard poll workers tell the people in question to leave. Officials responded that they were allowed to film because they were part of the “media.” Earlier, I heard a poll worker call the police.
As Ago went to vote, a masked man approached her and stood 4 to 5 feet away filming her. Polling workers instructed the masked man to back away as Ago did, but he refused. Ago argued that she had a right to privacy while voting, but the man responded, “I have no right to privacy while voting. I will not move.”
Mr. Ago got scared and went out into the hallway. When the masked man stepped into the hallway, Ago went back inside the polling station and cast his vote. Ago walked away and told the police officer what had happened to him. Ago drove past the polling place an hour later and found the three people filming her and other voters still standing outside the building, even as police cars were outside the building. He reported that he saw it.
Feldberg affirmed that he voted at First Presbyterian Church in Birmingham, Michigan on November 5, 2024 at approximately 1:00 p.m.Feldberg asserted that at approximately 1:10 p.m. The room where the woman swore she arrived in the hallway outside the polling station. One man had an American flag bandana over his face, while the other man did not cover his face. Feldberg described one man with a short beard and a black shirt, another man with a green shirt and a gray beard, and another man with a short beard and an orange vest. He swore he had a beard. Feldman acknowledged that the man and woman had cellphones with cameras that recorded video and that they used “selfie sticks” to insert the phones into the voting room. One of them stepped into the polling place, but only by about a foot. Everything “remains”[ed] At the entrance to the polling station, people were shouting, “Groups!”
Feldberg asserted that voters had to “almost push past” the group to get into the voting room because the group was blocking the door. Mr. Feldberg cast his vote and left the voting room. One of the men in the group then followed Feldberg into the hallway. Feldberg told the man:[t]The man placed his phone about a foot away from Feldberg’s face, prompting Feldberg to tell her he did not have permission to photograph her, to which the man responded, “Your request has been denied.” Ta. “Oh, look at her reaction.” Ms. Feldberg asserted that she returned to the polling place to be with her daughter, while the group asked voters why they would do such a thing. I asked if it was. people were there.
Feldberg told poll workers she didn’t feel comfortable walking to her car. The poll worker said she had called the police and asked if Feldberg wanted someone to take her away. Feldberg agreed, and a poll worker escorted her out through a different exit. When Mr. Feldberg arrived at his car, he saw a group of people following other voters into the car, and they could also be seen photographing Mr. Feldberg.
After this experience, Ms. Feldberg asserted that she reported these incidents to the police department. Ms Feldberg claimed that police told her the group had done nothing illegal and that there was nothing they could do because it was “free speech in public”. …
ACLU Executive Director[] Kogali said the ACLU reported that a group of six people, with two witnesses, including one voter and one poll worker, visited multiple polling places in Oakland County and entered buildings where voting was being conducted. He claimed to have been informed that voters were being filmed coming and going. He acted against his will by following voters to their cars while filming them and refusing to stop filming when asked to do so. Some voters were sufficiently intimidated that they attempted to flee the polling place by another route. The ACLU has had to divert resources to responding to and documenting voter intimidation in Oakland County, resulting in the amount of volunteers and financial resources available to the ACLU for core Election Day services for voters. has been reduced…
Although the court did not provide a very detailed analysis (perhaps because the case was being decided within hours), the conclusion was that:
Defendants will be ordered to stop harassing and intimidating voters inside and outside of polling places during the November 2024 election. This includes photographing voters entering and exiting a polling place or coming within 100 feet of a polling place entrance or required entry point. Following individuals as they leave polling places, enter and exit vehicles to polling places, and all other forms of threats and intimidation of violence while wearing masks, etc.
The defendants have not filed any documents, and it is unclear whether they even received advance notice allowing them to file documents or take a stand. (See the ACLU’s legal argument. here) The court had scheduled a preliminary injunction hearing, but it was canceled when the ACLU dismissed the lawsuit the day after Election Day. Of course, once the election is over, there is little left to do.
Note that lower courts have generally concluded that the First Amendment includes a right to record video in public places, at least in the case of public officials (such as police officers). The logic of these cases suggests that this right to information collection includes the right to video record even private individuals in public places. But that question remains open, as does the question of whether such recordings can be limited to specific situations or locations.
Finally, note that the court: supported laws It restricts campaigning within 100 feet of a polling place, and in Michigan it actually such a lawhowever, the injunction here appears to restrict “filming of voters entering and exiting polling places,” even if the filming is done from outside the 100-foot bubble zone.
