Summary
The Eleventh Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction concerning Georgia’s 25-foot polling-line gift ban under the Election Integrity Act. The court held that the district court had not conducted the facial First Amendment challenge analysis required by Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, including assessing the law’s full range of applications and weighing constitutional against unconstitutional applications. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with Moody.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court properly adjudicated the plaintiffs' facial First Amendment challenge to Georgia's 25-foot polling-line gift ban without conducting the facial-challenge analysis required by Moody v. NetChoice, LLC.
- Whether the Eleventh Circuit should decide the merits of the facial First Amendment challenge in the first instance or remand for the district court to apply the required analysis.
Holdings
- A court adjudicating a facial First Amendment challenge must assess the law's full scope, determine which applications violate the First Amendment and which do not, and weigh the constitutional applications against the unconstitutional applications; the challenge succeeds only when unconstitutional applications substantially outweigh constitutional ones.
- The district court erred by failing to conduct the facial-challenge analysis required by Moody before granting a preliminary injunction against the 25-foot polling-line gift ban.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, we VACATE the district court’s judgment and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with Moody.” (Opinion at 1)
“A facial challenge will succeed only when “the law’s unconstitutional applications substantially outweigh its constitutional ones.”” (603 U.S. at 724)
“The district court didn’t conduct the facial-challenge analysis now required by Moody.” (Opinion at 5)
“We decline to perform the Moody-prescribed facial-challenge analysis in the first instance.” (Opinion at 6)
Factual background
Georgia enacted the Election Integrity Act in 2021, including a prohibition on giving or offering money, food, drinks, or other gifts to voters within 150 feet of a polling place, inside a polling place, or within 25 feet of a voter standing in line. Advocacy groups argued that distributing food and water to waiting voters constituted protected expressive conduct and challenged the gift ban facially under the First Amendment. The district court ultimately enjoined enforcement of the 25-foot polling-line restriction, and the state defendants appealed.
Procedural history
Several organizations filed a facial First Amendment challenge to Georgia's restrictions on distributing money, food, drinks, or other gifts near polling places and voters standing in line. The district court initially declined to enjoin the provisions before the 2022 elections, although it concluded that the 25-foot polling-line buffer lacked adequate tailoring under strict scrutiny. In May 2023, after the immediate election-disruption concern had passed, the district court granted a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the 25-foot gift ban against anyone. The state defendants timely appealed.
Remand instructions
The district court must conduct the facial First Amendment challenge analysis required by Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, including assessing the full range of activities covered by the gift ban, determining which applications are constitutional or unconstitutional, and weighing those applications against each other.