PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER v. ROBINS

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
79-289
Appellee 
Robins
Appellant 
PruneYard Shopping Center
Opinion 
Advocates
(Argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging affirmance)
(Argued the cause for the appellee)
(Argued the cause for the appellants)
Tags
Term:
Location: The Pruneyard
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 
Decision: 9 votes for Robins, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Takings Clause

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.

Cite this Page
PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER v. ROBINS. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 04 April 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1979/1979_79_289>.
PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER v. ROBINS, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1979/1979_79_289 (last visited April 4, 2014).
"PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER v. ROBINS," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed April 4, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1979/1979_79_289.