Pg 38

Question 1

How do you discuss public forums doctrine on an essay?

Answer 1

– is the government trying to suppress speech because of a viewpoint? If not…
– Is the speech protected? If so…
– what is the nature of the forum the government wants to regulate?
– Traditional public forum: is it content neutral or content-based?
– What is the standard for the government action in that forum?
- Does the action meet the requirements for the standard?

Question 2

What is the rule for the government regulating speech in a traditional public forum?

Answer 2

The government can do this if they use reasonable content neutral restrictions to regulate speech

Question 3

Is preventing litter or maintaining public order enough to justify a complete ban on handing out flyers?

Answer 3

No

Question 4

What are the three different types of public forums under the first amendment?

Answer 4

– Traditional public forum
– designated public forum
– non-public forum

Question 5

How do courts determine if a forum is a traditional public forum, a designated public forum, or a non-public forum?

Answer 5

They look at the history and practice of the place

Question 6

What is a traditional public forum?

Answer 6

Public property with the principal purpose of the free exchange of ideas strongly shown by a long practice of permitting speech there and property that the government intentionally opens for public discourse.

This includes parks, sidewalks, and streets.

Question 7

All government property is considered to be public property, but does that mean that all public property is open to the public for free speech?

Answer 7

No

Question 8

In a traditional public forum, what kind of regulations can the government impose?

Answer 8

Content neutral TPM regulations, they can restrict prohibited speech like obscene material, or speech if it is necessary to promote a compelling interest

Question 9

What have streets and parks been traditionally used for?

Answer 9

Assembling, communicating thoughts, and discussing public questions.

Question 10

Can the government regulate streets and parks as traditional public forums?

Answer 10

Yes they can be regulated in the interest of all for general comfort and convenience of peace and good order

Question 11

What is the test for TPM regulations of speech in public forms?

Answer 11

The government can enforce these if they are content neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and they leave open ample alternate channels of communication

Question 12

Is a post office sidewalk considered to be a public forum?

Answer 12

There’s a split about this. Some of the supreme court justices said it was reasonable to restrict access here because solicitation could disrupt the postal service’s business, while the other justices said that the characteristic of the property cannot dictate the form analysis.

Question 13

Can governments restrict handbilling?

Answer 13

Yes, governments have a duty to keep streets open and available for movement of people and property (primary purpose of streets). The government can regulate the conduct of people on the streets if they do not abridge the constitutional liberties of people there to impart information through the speech of handbilling.

Ie: a person cannot handbill in the middle of a crowded street and stop traffic. The government can regulate speech in open-air places to make sure there’s a continuous ability to use the street or sidewalk or landmark. But wanting to keep streets tidy or looking nice is not enough to stop handbilling because streets are a natural and proper place for the dissemination of information and people have the right to express their views there in an orderly fashion

Question 14

What are reasons that the government cannot regulate a public forum to prevent speech?

Answer 14

– It may cause disorderliness
– the government doesn’t agree with the opinion
– it is annoying to have someone knock on your door
– people have to cross the street to avoid handbilling
– potential for litter

Question 15

Can content-based restrictions be put on polling places?

Answer 15

Yes because the court balances the right to engage in political speech against the right to vote.

I.e.: no solicitation of votes or distribution of campaign materials within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling station. This is OK because it serves the compelling state interest to prevent voter intimidation and election fraud. This is a reasonable viewpoint neutral regulation of a non-public forum

Question 16

Is it OK for the government to have regulations that forbid people from interfering with public access to an abortion clinic or from abusing people who enter or leave those clinics on the streets or sidewalks?

Answer 16

Yes, a 36 foot buffer zone on a public street is OK because it burdens no more speech than is necessary to protect access to the clinic and to assist the orderly flow of traffic on the street. Protesters can still be heard and seen from the parking lot. Noise restrictions are upheld because it’s reasonable to have them around medical facilities where patients get surgery.

The court could not ban the displaying of images that could be seen from the clinic because that was broader than necessary since people in the clinic could pull the curtains closed