December 2012 - Parks & Recreation - 30

LAW REVIEW

BIBLE DIS TRIBUTION REGUL ATED AT G AY PRIDE FES TIVAL

legitimate interests. " Applying this principle to the facts of the case, the federal
district court found the challenged regulation was indeed " narrowly tailored
to prevent a particular manner of expression from creating undue crowd
congestion by requiring that such expression be conducted from a stationary location. "
[T]he regulation is limited to only

district court held " the material distribution regulation is a content-neutral
time, place, and manner restriction
which is narrowly tailored to serve
a significant government interest
and which provides ample alternative channels of communication. "
The federal district court, therefore,
denied Johnson's request for a court
order blocking MPRB's material regulation for the Festival.

one form of expressive activity-

At issue here is not blanket pro-

distribution of material. All other

hibition on speech, it is a regulation

protected expressive activities are

of the time and places that one par-

Postscript

permitted. The regulation is also

ticular manner of speech may be

limited in terms of time; it persists

exercised. Apart from the require-

only during the two days of the

ment that materials be distributed

Festival. The regulation is further

from a booth, Plaintiff [Johnson] is

limited in terms of place, applying

free to engage in all other forms of

only to certain areas within the

non-disruptive expressive activity

boundaries of Loring Park.

throughout Loring Park. He is free

On June 21, 2012, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
granted Johnson's " motion for injunction pending appeal " of the decision
of the federal district court described
above. As a result, pending appeal,
MPRB was blocked from enforcing the
challenged material distribution regulation at the 2012 Festival. Accordingly,
on June 22, 2012, MPRB Superintendent Jayne Miller issued the following
notice to Twin Cities Pride:

The MPRB booths provide an

to wear clothing expressing his be-

outlet for the distribution of any

liefs, to hold signs, to approach at-

material-regardless of viewpoint-

tendees and converse with those

in Loring Park during the Festival.

willing to engage with him, and to

MPRB booths are located in an area

direct attendees to areas where

contiguous on two sides with the

they may receive a free Bible

Festival, with no physical boundar-

should they desire one.

ies separating it from the Festival.
Materials may also be distributed
by placing them in the designated
drop zone within the Festival.

Alternative Communication
Channels?
The federal district court also considered " whether the material distribution
regulation provides ample alternative
channels of communication. " In so doing, the court would determine whether
Johnson was " afforded an opportunity
to direct his intended message at his
intended recipients. "
In this case, the court found Johnson's intended audience was Festival
attendees. Further, given " the narrow scope of the regulation, " the court
found Johnson had " many opportunities to spread his message to Festival
28

attendees. " While acknowledging that
Johnson's ability to distribute Bibles
was limited, the court noted that it was
" far from completely curtailed. " Speciﬁcally, the court noted that Johnson
could " leave materials in the material
drop zone within the Festival and may
also hand-distribute materials within Loring Park from an MPRB-Area
booth. "

Parks & Recreation

As a result, the federal district court
concluded that " the material distribution regulation provides Plaintiff [Johnson] with ample alternative channels of
communication to present his message
to his intended audience. "

Based upon the decision of the
Eighth Circuit to enjoin the MPRB's
ban on material distribution during
the 2012 Pride Festival, the MPRB
will not enforce the ban as to anyone who seeks to distribute noncommercial materials during the
2012 Pride Festival. We have instructed our employees to allow

Conclusion

non-commercial speech during

As characterized by the federal district
court, MPRB and Twin Cities Pride
had negotiated a plan which provided fewer restrictions on Johnson's
activities than those sought by Twin
Cities Pride and expanded Johnson's
opportunities to spread his message
to Festival attendees. In so doing, the
court found MPRB had successfully met the " challenge of attempting
to reconcile Twin Cities Pride's and
Johnson's competing First Amendment rights. " Accordingly, the federal

the 2012 Pride Festival unless the

| DECEMBER 2012 | WWW.NRPA.ORG

speech rises to the level of a violation of law.

As of October 2012, the federal appeals court for the Eighth Circuit had
yet to rule on Johnson's appeal.
James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. is an
attorney and associate professor in the
School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism
at George Mason University. Email:
jkozlows@gmu.edu. Webpage with link to
Law Review articles archive (1982 to
present): http://mason.gmu.
edu/~jkozlows.

December 2012 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of December 2012 - Parks & Recreation