Protests outside the Supreme Court – U.S. v. Grace, 1983: struck down rules restricting protest outside the court, must allow demonstrators access to the court b/c is public forum.
Discretionary Public Forum: historically applied to jails, military bases, libraries schools, airports, public property, city-owned buses, mailboxes, public school mailboxes.
State can cut it off if it has a good reason: ex: purposes may be inconsistent with the 1st Amend.
Once state has opened it up, must be evenhanded in application (jails, military bases, public schools, airport, public property). Though can be non-evenhanded when captive audience involved (city owned buses, home mail boxes, inter-school mailbag). Then gov’t can distinguish b/w speakers and subject matters.
Public Libraries: Brown v. Louisiana, 1966 (as applied) :Overturns breach of the peace action vs. blacks protesting segregation of public library by quiet sit-in. Post Brown v. Bd so had a rt to be there. Public library is a public forum (open, purposes consistent). Symbolic demonstration, breach here is just to show distaste at the library’s point of view. Protest as competing use.
Jails: Adderley v. Florida, 1966: students trespass upon jail to protest arrest of students. Allowed restriction b/c jail is NOT a public forum: Jails not open to general public, purposes not consistent with the 1st A, adequate alts were available to dissent, restrictions were applied evenhandedly and were content-neutral, legitimate state interest in jail security—protest would be COMPETING USE
Public Schools: p. 1267 Grayned v. Rockford (1972) anti-noise ordinance in public schoolsà upheld because there are interests in education and having an undisrupted school session conducive to students’ learning. Barred demonstration near a school and as long as it’s even handed there’s no problem. However, regulation that bans only wearing of black armbands against Vietnam is struck down as content-based.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
