Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court concerning the constitutionality of governmental speech restrictions in a polling place venue.

While the Supreme Court previously affirmed that political campaigning near polling places may be restricted, the Minnesota law was challenged on being overbroad and violation of free speech rights under the First Amendment.

To deal with this, all states started to pass laws during the late 1800s and early 1900s that transformed polling places into the more ordered affairs in current times, where voters wait in line and have privacy in making and submitting their vote.

[2] Since then, the state has defended the law as a means to make polling places as "an orderly and controlled environment without confusion, interference or distraction".

[2] The plaintiffs were represented pro-bono by Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit, public interest law firm that litigates free speech and other individual rights issues.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch.

[3] Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion, joined by Stephen Breyer, arguing that the case should have been presented to the Minnesota Supreme Court for a definitive ruling on what was prohibited or not by the apparel law.