**You really ought to take a look at this link, it's pretty interesting**.
Michael A. Carrigan, a city council member in Sparks, had been censured for failing to recuse himself with respect to a matter in which his close friend and campaign manager had a clear interest. He challenged the censure first on the ground that the statute requiring recusal was vague and overbroad and, second, on the First Amendment ground that voting was an expression of a political opinion and as such merited the highest constitutional protection.
The Nevada Supreme Court agreed and held the relevant statute unconstitutional because voting contains “a communicative element” and “serves an important role in political speech.” The respondent’s brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case cites to Miller v. Town of Hull (1st Circuit, 1989): “There can be no more definitive expression of opinion than by voting on a controversial public issue.” Justice Samuel Alito, in a concurring opinion that is really a dissent, echoes the sentiment: “Voting has an expressive component in and of itself.”Answer Question
Answer by yourspecialkid at 9:27 AM on Jun. 22, 2011
Answer by Anonymous at 10:08 AM on Jun. 22, 2011
Answer by meriana at 10:30 AM on Jun. 22, 2011
Answer by Anonymous at 10:31 AM on Jun. 22, 2011