Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

United States v. Kokinda

Supreme Court of the United States · 1990 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawFirst AmendmentFreedom of SpeechPublic Forum Doctrinepostal sidewalksolicitationnonpublic forumreasonableness

Facts

Respondents, volunteers for the National Democratic Policy Committee, set up a table on a sidewalk near the entrance of the Bowie, Maryland, Post Office to solicit contributions, sell books and newspaper subscriptions, and distribute political literature. The sidewalk was entirely on Postal Service property and served as the only route from the parking lot to the post office entrance, existing solely for postal patrons to reach the building. Postal employees received between 40 and 50 complaints about respondents' presence, and the postmaster asked them to leave. When they refused, postal inspectors arrested them and seized their table and materials for violating 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(h)(1).

Issue

Whether a Postal Service regulation prohibiting '[s]oliciting alms and contributions' on postal premises violates the First Amendment as applied to respondents' solicitation on a postal sidewalk leading from the parking lot to the post office entrance. The question turned on what level of scrutiny applies to the sidewalk and whether the ban was valid under that standard.

Rule

When the government has not traditionally or intentionally dedicated its property to expressive activity, the property is a nonpublic forum and speech restrictions there are valid if they are reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum and are not an effort to suppress expression because of disagreement with the speaker's viewpoint. The mere fact that property is physically similar to a public sidewalk or open to the public does not by itself make it a traditional public forum; the location and purpose of the property are critical.

🔒

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.

In Columbus, Ohio, a federal mail station sits on its own lot with a parking area in front and a short walkway connecting the lot to the entrance. The walkway lies entirely on Postal Service property and is used only by customers going between their cars and the lobby. Lena Ortiz stands there asking patrons for immediate cash donations to her veterans' aid group.

If Lena challenges a postal rule barring solicitation on postal premises, which is the strongest analysis under the controlling doctrine?

Explanation. The lead opinion focuses on the location and purpose of the property, not merely its physical resemblance to an ordinary sidewalk. A postal entry walkway on postal property that exists solely to move customers from parking to the entrance is not a traditional public forum. In a nonpublic forum, a speech restriction is valid if it is reasonable in light of the forum's purpose and not an effort to suppress a viewpoint.