Arkansas Ed. Television Comm. v. Forbes

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Richard D. Marks (Argued the cause for the petitioner)
Kelly J. Shackelford (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Lawrence G. Wallace (On behalf of the United States, as amicus curiae)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
96-779
Petitioner: 
Arkansas Ed. Television Comm.
Respondent: 
Forbes
Opinion: 
523 U.S. 666 (1998)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Arkansas Ed. Television Comm. v. Forbes , 523 U.S. 666 (1998)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1997/1997_96_779)
Facts of the Case: 

During the 1992 race for Arkansas' Third Congressional District, the Arkansas Educational Television Commission (AETC) -- a state-owned public television broadcaster -- sponsored a debate between the major party candidates. Running as an independent candidate with little popular support, Ralph Forbes sought to participate in the debate but was denied permission. After unsuccessfully challenging AETC's refusal in district court, Forbes appealed and won a reversal. AETC then appealed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Question: 

Is the exclusion of a ballot-qualified candidate from a debate sponsored by a state-owned public television broadcaster a violation of the candidate's First Amendment right to freedom of speech?

Conclusion: 

No. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that public broadcasters could selectively exclude participants from their sponsored debates, so long as these were not designed as "public forums." The Court found that by reserving participation rights only to candidates for a particular congressional district, rather then hosting an open-microphone format, and selecting among those which were eligible to participate, based on objective indications of their popular support rather then their view points, AETC's debate was a "nonpublic forum." As such, AETC could decide who should and should not participate in its sponsored event.

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for Arkansas Ed. Television Comm., 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Wrote a dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Wrote the majority opinion
Kennedy
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer

Full Opinion by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy