Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc.

Supreme Court of the United States · 1981 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawFirst AmendmentFreedom of SpeechTime, Place, and Manner RestrictionsPublic ForumFirst Amendmentreligious literaturesolicitation

Facts

The Minnesota Agricultural Society operated the Minnesota State Fair on a 125-acre state-owned tract that drew very large crowds and included approximately 1,400 exhibitors and concessionaires. Under Rule 6.05, as construed by the Society, any person or organization wishing to sell or distribute written material or solicit funds at the Fair had to do so from a fixed, licensed booth location rented on a first-come, first-served, nondiscriminatory basis. The Rule did not bar representatives from walking through the fairgrounds and discussing their views face-to-face with patrons. ISKCON challenged the Rule because its religious practice of Sankirtan called for members to go into public places to distribute or sell religious literature and solicit donations.

Issue

Whether the First and Fourteenth Amendments permit a State to require a religious organization at a state fair to distribute and sell religious literature and solicit donations only from an assigned fixed location within the fairgrounds. More specifically, whether Minnesota's booth rule was a valid time, place, and manner restriction.

Rule

The First Amendment does not guarantee a right to communicate at all times, places, or in any manner desired. A restriction on expressive activity is permissible as a time, place, and manner regulation when it is content neutral, serves a significant governmental interest, is not administered through arbitrary discretion, and leaves open ample alternative channels for communication within the relevant forum.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

The Ohio Heritage Expo, held for 10 days on state-owned fairgrounds in Columbus, draws more than 100,000 visitors per day. Expo rules require any group that wants to distribute pamphlets, sell booklets, or request donations to do so only from rented booths assigned on a first-come, first-served basis, but allow representatives to walk the grounds and talk with attendees about their views.

A religious ministry argues the rule violates the First Amendment because its message is most effective when members approach people while they are walking. How should a court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that the First Amendment does not guarantee the right to communicate at all times, places, or in any manner desired. A booth rule is permissible when justified without reference to content, applied evenhandedly, supported by a significant governmental interest such as crowd movement and safety in a crowded fair setting, and leaving adequate alternatives. The ability to move through the grounds, speak face-to-face, and use a booth within the forum provides ample alternative channels. (Derived from Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. (1981).)