If we learned in third grade that you cannot campaign within 100 feet of a polling place, then it definitely proves Moochelle Obama is not smarter than a fifth grader!!
ST762
Was not for campaigning, was for discussing politics, read the article.
Yes, she was telling people to vote to support the presidents agenda.
Comprehend the article.
First line of article.
First lady Michelle Obama appears to have violated Illinois law -- when she engaged in political discussion at a polling place
From a few lines further down - I know it would tax you to read more than the first line, so here it is:
"She was telling me how important it was to vote to keep her husband's agenda going," Campbell said.
From about the 7th line:
Illinois state law -- Sec. 17-29 (a) -- states: "No judge of election, pollwatcher, or other person shall, at any primary or election, do any electioneering or soliciting of votes or engage in any political discussion within any polling place [or] within 100 feet of any polling place."
Hard to see how her telling someone to vote to further her dear hubbies agenda is anything but electioneering. Or political discussion.
In 3rd grade we learn that electioneering involves signs and/or pamphlets. And that political discussion does not have a legal definition, rendering it very difficult to prosecute.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/15/michelle-obama-and-illinois-election-law/Did Michelle Obama violate Illinois election law?
The question arose after the first lady, who voted early at her Chicago precinct Thursday, responded to voters who voiced support for her husband. It’s unlawful in the state to have a “political discussion” or engage in “electioneering” within 100 feet of a polling place.
A pool report by Chicago Sun-Times reporter Abdon Pallasch said Obama had a photo taken with electrician Dennis Campbell, 56 years old. It quoted Campbell as saying, “She was telling me how important it was to vote to keep her husband’s agenda going.”
Pallasch told Washington Wire that the voters came up to Obama after they had cast their own ballots, and that they initiated conversation with her.
Election-law specialists said those circumstances mean Obama is off the hook.
“Usually we picture electioneering as somebody with a sign, a concerted effort to convince voters,” said Richard Hasen, a professor at Loyola Law School, Los Angeles. “It’s hard to imagine that a casual comment like that would be taken seriously as a violation of the law.”
Deanna Mool, who practices election law in Springfield, Ill., said the statute is intended to protect voters from being pressured at the ballot box. She said she hadn’t heard of anyone being prosecuted for violating the statute. Instead, poll workers generally ask violators to stop or move their activities 100 feet outside the polling station.
While electioneering is usually understood as involving signs or pamphlets, “political discussion” doesn’t seem to have a legal definition, Mool said.
And that could be a flaw in the Illinois law, said Hasen.
In 1992, the Supreme Court upheld by a vote of 5-3 a Tennessee law barring displays of campaign posters and solicitation of votes within 100 feet of polling places. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that history and “simple common sense” suggested the rule was a reasonable compromise between the fundamental rights of free speech and voting without intimidation.
The court did not address whether all “political discussion” could also be banned. Hasen was doubtful.
“It would surprise me if it’s constitutional,” he said.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs didn’t see anything surprising in Michelle Obama’s comments. “I don’t think it would be much to imagine that the first lady might support her husband’s agenda,” he said. “But that’s just me going way out on a limb.”
