American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective (packet)

Public Property cases

Mandatory		Discretionary
- State c/n cut it off, it must leave it open to all speakers - Even handed: treat all speech equally		- state can cut them off if it does so even handedly
Traditional	Recent	Even handed	Non even handed
Parks and Streets	-state capital grounds -public libraries -municipal theaters -private property	-jails -military base -public schools -airports -public property	-city owned bus -home mail box -intra-school mail box

3. 
   Prior Restraint Cases: Licenses have effect of prior restraint. Licensing was imposed in early era to tame demons and impose state’s J of harms before it’s published. No licensing (also for parades)à const democracy must be based on idea that individs themselves make these decisions, not the State. Under protected speech looked at govt licensing schemes (when will ppl have parade in Central Park) but a lot of them struck down when had prior restraints (Lovell, Saia and Kunz struck down b/c d/n limit authority to time, place and manner or was content-based). Allowed prior restraint in Cox b/c evidence that police was regulating in neutral way.
   
   1. 
      Mass v. Davis, 1895: state c/n limit speech before it occurs
      
   2. 
      Saia v. NY, 1948: struck down statute banning use of sound amplification device without prior permission/permit of police chief. Leads to political abuse, illimitable discretion with no guidelines. Impliedly content based b/c sound trucks are poor man’s public forum
      
   3. 
      Lovell v. Griffin (1938) p. 1350: Reversed conviction under ordinance that prohibited distribution of any literature w/in the city w/out first obtaining written permission from the city manager.
      
   4. 
      Cox v. New Hampshire, 1941(as applied) permit statute was upheld, just TPM restriction as applied to group of Jehovah’s witnesses. Reasonable system, would be struck down if regulation stopped expression altogether. Permit is OK if discretion is limited (easy to go and get permit which is administered in neutral way) and it’s for public convenience. If it’s likely to be used in a content-based way it will be struck down. What if they ban use of signs? Unconstitutionalà bans an entire medium and you can’t just say it’s TPM (i.e. can’t force to march 1 mile apart).
      
4.