Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Keith Ellison

Summary

The court held that the plaintiffs had standing because defending the pending counterclaim and the credible threat of enforcement injured their First Amendment interests. It concluded that the challenged restriction on political speech is content based, subject to strict scrutiny, and likely unconstitutional as applied because it is both overinclusive and underinclusive and lacks adequate tailoring. The court also held that the statute's preemptive injunction provision authorizes an unconstitutional prior restraint, rejected the vagueness challenge, and remanded for entry of a preliminary injunction.