BURSON v. FREEMAN 504 U.S. 191 (1992)

There is no speech more important for a democracy than political speech pertaining to elections. Nevertheless, all fifty states prohibit political speech in and around polling places on election day. In Burson v. Freeman, the Supreme Court, in a 5–3 decision, held that a ban on political speech within 100 feet of the entrance to polling places on election day was not an unconstitutional infringement of the freedom of speech.

The plurality opinion of Justice harry a. blackmun reasoned that the impairment of core first amendment rights was justified by the compelling state interest in avoiding voter intimidation and election fraud. Despite the overbreadth of the ban—not all prohibited speech would intimidate voters or threaten fraud—the Court was swayed by the fact that every state has long-standing "campaign-free" zones around polling places and by the fear that other measures to preserve electoral integrity might involve unwelcome police presence at the polls.

Justice john paul stevens, in dissent, agreed that the state's interests were compelling, but argued that smaller campaign-free zones, perhaps no larger than 50 feet, were adequate to insure free access to the polls. Moreover, the ban's application to ordinary campaign-related speech, such as posters and signs, was content-discriminatory and bore no relationship to the prevention of fraud or intimidation.

Adam Winkler
(2000)