Lee v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc.
112 S. Ct. 2709, 1992 U.S. LEXIS 4535, 505 U.S. 830 (1992)
Rule of Law:
A complete ban on the distribution of noncommercial literature in the interior terminals of public airports violates the First Amendment, as such areas are at least a 'limited public forum' for expressive activities.
Facts:
- The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey operates three major airports in the New York metropolitan area, serving millions of travelers annually.
- The Port Authority enacted regulations that prohibited all 'First Amendment activities,' including the distribution of literature and the solicitation of funds, inside airport terminals.
- The Port Authority considered its airport terminals to be commercial spaces, not traditional public forums for expressive activities.
- The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), a religious organization, sought to distribute religious literature and solicit donations in these airport terminals as part of their religious practice.
- The Port Authority asserted that allowing such activities would lead to congestion, safety concerns, and potential fraud, disrupting the efficient flow of passengers.
Procedural Posture:
- The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) challenged the Port Authority's regulations prohibiting expressive activities in airport terminals in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- The District Court granted summary judgment for the Port Authority, upholding the regulations as reasonable restrictions on speech in a non-public forum.
- ISKCON appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (ISKCON was the appellant, Port Authority the appellee).
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the ban on solicitation but reversed the ban on the distribution of literature, ruling that the ban on distribution was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
- The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, as petitioner, filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging the Court of Appeals' decision invalidating the ban on literature distribution (ISKCON was the respondent).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a total ban on the distribution of literature in airport terminals, operated by a public authority, permissible under the First Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No, a total ban on the distribution of literature in airport terminals is not permissible under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals, which held that the ban on distribution of literature in the Port Authority airport terminals was invalid. The Court adopted the reasoning set forth in the separate opinions of Justice O’Connor, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Souter, which collectively concluded that while airport terminals might not be traditional public forums, the complete prohibition on literature distribution was an impermissible restriction on speech.
Dissenting - Chief Justice Rehnquist
Yes, a ban on the distribution of literature in airport terminals is permissible under the First Amendment. Chief Justice Rehnquist argued that leafletting, much like solicitation, poses risks of congestion and additional burdens on the Port Authority. He contended that 'weary, harried, or hurried' travelers may desire to avoid delays from having literature 'foisted upon him' just as much as avoiding financial solicitations. He also highlighted that accepting material might lead to travelers stopping to debate, obstructing others, or simply dropping the material, creating litter, safety hazards, and additional cleanup work. Furthermore, he suggested that enforcing a differential ban (permitting leafletting but prohibiting solicitation) could be nearly as burdensome as a complete ban, making the allowance of leafletting a 'Pyrrhic victory' for the Port Authority given its substantial congestion problems.
Analysis:
This case, decided concurrently with International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee, clarified the application of First Amendment public forum doctrine to airport terminals, distinguishing between solicitation and distribution of literature. The Court established that while the government may prohibit solicitation in airport terminals, a total ban on the distribution of literature is an unconstitutional restriction on speech. This creates a nuanced framework for regulating expressive conduct in non-traditional public spaces, requiring a more tailored approach based on the specific nature and impact of the expressive activity.
