Also known as: open forums · public forum
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A government-owned space or facility opened for expressive activity by the public or designated groups. Content-based restrictions on speech in such a space are subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment and are presumptively invalid.
Odessa Okada stands on a public sidewalk near a foreign embassy holding a sign criticizing the embassy's home government. City police cite her under an ordinance that bars only signs critical of foreign governments within 500 feet of embassies. The restriction singles out her message for prohibition while allowing supportive or unrelated signs in the same location.
Odin Obeng erects a large Latin cross on the state-owned plaza in front of the capitol during the holiday season. State officials deny the permit solely because the display is religious. The plaza has long been used by private groups for speeches, rallies, and seasonal exhibits without content screening.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Oliver Okeke submits an article to a university-funded student publication that discusses religious viewpoints on contemporary moral issues. University administrators refuse to pay the printing costs because the piece advances a religious perspective. The university routinely funds other student journals that address political and social topics.
Oscar Ortiz produces a documentary critical of a sitting senator and seeks to air it through a nonprofit advocacy group within thirty days of an election. Federal election officials block distribution under rules that prohibit corporations from using general treasury funds for electioneering communications. The same rules permit individuals and media organizations to distribute comparable material.
Octavia Okonkwo publishes a monthly magazine devoted to religious commentary and seeks the same sales-tax exemption granted to other nonprofit periodicals. State officials deny the exemption because the content is religious. Secular publications addressing political and social issues receive the exemption without regard to viewpoint.
Orla O'Malley and fellow demonstrators stand on a public sidewalk 1,000 feet from a funeral carrying signs that condemn the deceased's lifestyle and the nation's policies. The family sues for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The protest occurs in a traditional public forum and addresses matters of public concern without physical obstruction of the ceremony.
Strict scrutiny applies. The government must show that the restriction is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest, and content-based exclusions are presumptively invalid.
Supporting sources
An open forum is a space the government has opened for expressive activity by the public or designated groups. A nonpublic forum is not opened for such activity, so the government may impose reasonable, viewpoint-neutral restrictions.
Supporting sources
No. Once the government opens a forum to speech on a particular subject, it may not exclude religious viewpoints on that subject without satisfying strict scrutiny.
Supporting sources
Yes, if the restriction is content neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leaves open ample alternative channels of communication.
Supporting sources
…e. g. , Marks v. United States , 430 U. S. 188, 198 (1977) (Stevens, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), and "public forum," see, e. g. , United States Postal Service v. Council of Greenburgh Civic Assns. , 453 U. S. 114, 126-131 (1981); id. , at 136-140 (Brennan, J., concurring in judgment); id. , at…