PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins

Media Items

Oral Argument

Expanded View

Download MP3

Advocates

Elinor Hadley Stillman (Argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging affirmance)

Philip L. Hammer (Argued the cause for the appellee)

Max L. Gillam (Argued the cause for the appellants)

Case Basics

Docket No.:

79-289

Appellee:

Robins

Appellant:

PruneYard Shopping Center

Decided By:

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion:

447 U.S. 74 (1980)

Argued:

Tuesday, March 18, 1980

Decided:

Monday, June 9, 1980

Issues:

Due Process, Takings Clause

Categories:

jurisdiction, property, freedom of speech, fifth amendment, first amendment

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins , 447 U.S. 74 (1980)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1979/1979_79_289)

Facts of the Case:

High school students seeking support for their opposition to a United Nations resolution against Zionism set up a table in PruneYard to distribute literature and solicit signatures for a petition. A security guard told them to leave since their actions violated the shopping center's regulations against "publicly expressive" activities.

Question:

Did PruneYard's regulations violate the students' free speech rights?

Conclusion:

Yes. Since the California Constitution protected "speech and petitioning, reasonably exercised, in shopping centers even when the shopping centers are privately owned," PruneYard could not prevent the students from soliciting on its property. The Court argued that it was within California's power to guarantee this expansive free speech right since it did not unreasonably intrude on the rights of private property owners.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for Robins, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Takings Clause

Sort by Ideology