Notable Items:

Tripartite test for public v non-public fora of government property. Solicitation impedes the normal flow of traffic. See Heffron, 452 U.S. at 452 U. S. 653

Facts:

Petitioner's Claim(s):

Respondents contend that, although the sidewalk is on postal service property, because it is not distinguishable from the municipal sidewalk across the parking lot from the post office's entrance, it must be a traditional public forum and therefore subject to strict scrutiny.

Issues:

Does a United States Postal Service regulation that prohibits "[s]oliciting alms and contributions" on postal premises violates the First Amendment.
We hold the regulation valid as applied.

Holding(s):

The judgment of the court of appeals is Reversed.
We are called upon in this case to determine whether a United States Postal Service regulation that prohibits "[s]oliciting alms and contributions" on postal premises violates the First Amendment. We hold the regulation valid as applied.

Rationale:

O'Connor majority opinion (Rehnquist, White, Scalia)

Kennedy concur in judgement

Brennan dissent (Marshall, Stevens, and Blackmun in part)