Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Literature/writing

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Literature/writing

Court rules airports not public forums

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court upheld a ban on solicitation at New York airports, but not a ban on pamphlet distribution, ruling that airports do not fit the criteria for a traditional public forum. Five of the justices argued that airports are public facilities with the primary function of providing transportation services and that can restrict access for security purposes, unlike most bus and train stations. Four of the justices agreed with the ban, but not the majority's reasoning.

Publisher: Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1992
Laws, regulations and rules, Airports, Forums (Discussion and debate)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


'Anti-littering' ordinance to stop home newspaper delivery is unconstitutional

Article Abstract:

The Georgia Supreme Court in Statesboro Publishing Corp. v. City of Sylvania struck down a municipal ordinance forbidding the distribution of free printed material to homes as a violation of the free speech provisions of the federal and state constitutions. The court's majority held the ordinance not to be narrowly tailored to protect urban beauty and prevent litter and not to provide for "meaningful alternatives of communication."

Publisher: Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1999
Georgia, Ordinances, Municipal, Municipal ordinances, Litter (Trash)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Court strikes down hate-speech ordinance

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court has declared a St Paul, MN, hate speech ordinance unconstitutional in R.A.V. v City of St Paul. The court ruled that the ordinance attempted to regulate the content of speech, favored certain viewpoints over others and did not constitute a legitimate state interest. The court unanimously rejected the argument that the ordinance fit the constitutional category of 'fighting words.'

Publisher: Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Publication Name: News Media & the Law
Subject: Literature/writing
ISSN: 0149-0737
Year: 1992
Hate speech, Overbreadth doctrine (Law), Overbreadth doctrine

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Cases, Freedom of speech
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Court rules teachers are public officials. Privilege covering statement at council hearings not absolute; statements unrelated to matter discussed or known to be false not protected
  • Abstracts: Court declines to review public official ruling. State high court affirms libel verdict over editorial. Court upholds critic's review of 'fake phantom.' (drama critic's review of Ken Hill's version of 'Phantom of the Opera')
  • Abstracts: Court allows use of unpublished work. Court protects raw footage used in news stories. Parody of magazine photograph ruled a 'fair use.'
  • Abstracts: FBI used reporter's name to talk to spy. Albuquerque police impersonate journalist
  • Abstracts: House committees bar C-SPAN cameras. Coast Guard hinders access to freighter interception
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.