State v. Robert Lee Miller, III

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that advertising space on the side of a public bus is unlike open spaces, meeting halls, parks, street corners, and other public thoroughfares
• holding that subject matter discrimination excluding political speech in a nonpublic forum is permissible; viewpoint discrimination is not permissible
• holding that “the policies and practices governing access to the transit system’s advertising space must not be arbitrary, capricious, or invidious”
• concluding that advertising areas on city buses were not public fora because the city intended to limit access to advertising space
• holding that a city’s decision to exclude political advertisements from its buses was permissible under the First Amendment because the city was acting as a proprietor
• holding that a city’s decision to exclude political advertisements from its buses was permissible under the First Amendment because the city was acting as a proprietor

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).