case that indicates that Ohio intended to open up nontraditional forums such as schools and privately-owned buildings for public discourse merely by utilizing portions of them as polling places on election day.... ... By opening up portions of schools and private property for use as polling places on election day, Ohio has not opened up a nontraditional forum for public discourse. In fact, there is no evidence in the record of discourse of any sort. There is no evidence of expressive activity occurring anywhere on the properties involved, other than “each voter’s communication of his own elective choice, and this has long been carried out privately — by secret ballot in a restricted space.” See Marlin v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections & Ethics, 236 F.3d 716, 719 (D.C.Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Id. at 749-50. The Sixth Circuit explained
holding that the interiors of polling places are nonpublic forums holding that judicial and municipal complexes are nonpublic forums holding that arguments that are not raised or that are not accompanied by factual and legal support are deemed waived recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state holding that claimants stipulations conceding the admiralty courts exclusive jurisdiction to determine all issues relating to limitation of liability and prioritization of their claims allowed them to proceed with common law actions in other forums