Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
Significance, The State's Constitutional Guarantee Of Free Speech, The First Amendment Concerns, Related Cases
Pruneyard Shopping Center and Fred Sahadi, owner
Michael Robins, et al.
That a provision of the California Constitution guaranteeing an individual's right to free speech at privately owned shopping centers violates the owner's property and free speech rights under the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Max L. Gillam, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Philip L. Hammer
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
9 June 1980
Denied the appellant's claim and affirmed the ruling of the California Supreme Court.
Joan Biskupic and Elder Witt, Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1997.
- Randall Adams Trial: 1977 - Surprise Witnesses Emerge
- Poelker v. Doe - Significance, Another Reversal, Complicated Issues
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Further Readings
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Significance
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - The State's Constitutional Guarantee Of Free Speech
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - The First Amendment Concerns
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Related Cases
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins - Are Malls Public Places?
- Other Free Encyclopedias