Also known as: public forum · public-forum · public forum doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Government property or programs open to expressive activities by the public or private speakers, including streets, parks, and sidewalks traditionally open for speech as well as property the government intentionally designates for such use. In these spaces the government may impose content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions that are narrowly tailored to serve an important interest and leave open ample alternative channels, but content-based restrictions trigger strict scrutiny.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pablo Perez stands on a public sidewalk 150 feet from a foreign consulate holding a placard criticizing that nation's human-rights record. City officers order him to leave under an ordinance that bars only signs critical of foreign governments near embassies. Perez sues, claiming the rule singles out his political message for suppression in a traditional public forum.
Members of a small church group stand on a public sidewalk across from a funeral service holding signs that read 'God Hates the USA.' The family of the deceased sues for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The protesters defend on the ground that the sidewalk is a public forum where their speech on matters of public concern receives full First Amendment protection.
A private religious organization seeks a permit to erect a menorah on the public lawn in front of the state capitol during the holiday season. State officials deny the permit, citing concerns about government endorsement. The group sues, arguing that the open lawn functions as a public forum where private religious speech cannot be excluded.
A county permits a private group to place a nativity scene on the front steps of the county courthouse, a location long used for public gatherings. A rival organization sues, claiming the display violates the Establishment Clause. The county defends by noting that the steps are a public forum open to all private speakers on equal terms.
A public university refuses to fund a student newspaper that publishes articles from a religious perspective while funding other student publications. The editors sue, arguing that the university's student-activity fund operates as a designated public forum in which viewpoint discrimination is forbidden.
An Asian-American band applies to register the name 'The Slants' as a trademark. The Patent Office rejects the application on the ground that the name is disparaging. The band sues, contending that the registration system cannot deny marks based on the viewpoint expressed when the underlying speech occurs in channels open to private expression.
Content-based restrictions in a public forum are subject to strict scrutiny and are presumptively invalid unless the government proves they are necessary to serve a compelling interest and are narrowly tailored.
A designated public forum arises when the government intentionally opens property for expressive activity. Once opened, it is treated like a traditional public forum for speech purposes and subject to the same strict rules against content discrimination.
…e. g. , Marks v. United States , 430 U. S. 188, 198 (1977) (Stevens, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), and "public forum," see, e. g. , United States Postal Service v. Council of Greenburgh Civic Assns. , 453 U. S. 114, 126-131 (1981); id. , at 136-140 (Brennan, J., concurring in judgment); id. , at…
…may create and disseminate video and audio recordings; they may circulate petitions; they may speak to individuals and groups in public forums and in any private venue that wishes to accommodate them; they may picket peacefully in countless locations; they may appear on television and speak on the radio; they may post messages on…
…401 U. S. 371 (1971), and in deciding that a local government could not entirely foreclose the opportunity to speak in a public forum
…(1983). These principles provide the framework forbidding the State to exercise viewpoint discrimination, even when the limited public forum
…of his own property justifies the disparate treatment.” Id. , at 811. We also rejected as “misplaced” respondents’ reliance on public forum
No. Once a public university or other government body opens facilities to student or outside groups, it creates a designated public forum and may not exclude religious groups on the basis of the religious content of their speech.
The restriction must be content neutral, narrowly tailored to serve an important government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of communication.
Yes. When the military abandons exclusive control and leaves streets open as public thoroughfares, those streets are treated as public forums and First Amendment standards apply.