Settling the Debate About Jehovah's Witnesses And Soliciting

by Bangalore 10 Replies latest jw friends

  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    Shouting from the sidewalk sounds like a First Amendment right but stepping on stairs, porch or portico must be some qausi area

    Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New Yor k, Inc. v. Village of Stratton
    536 U.S. 150, 122 S.Ct. 2080
    U.S.,2002.

    For over 50 years, this Court has invalidated on First Amendment grounds [government] restrictions on door-to-door canvassing and pamphleteering by Jehovah's Witnesses. See, e.g., Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S.Ct. 870, 87 L.Ed. 1292. Although those cases do not directly control the question at issue, they yield several themes that guide the Court. Among other things, *151 those cases emphasize that the hand distribution of religious tracts is ages old and has the same claim as more orthodox practices to the guarantees of freedom of religion, speech, and press, e.g., id., at 109, 63 S.Ct. 870; discuss extensively the historical importance of door-to-door canvassing and pamphleteering as vehicles for the dissemination of ideas, e.g., Schneider v. State (Town of Irvington), 308 U.S. 147, 164, 60 S.Ct. 146, 84 L.Ed. 155

    Quotes from "Property: Cases and Materials," 2nd edition, Smith, et. al., page 148-9.

    "For our purposes, Watchtower raises a basic question that transcends its First Amendment context: When, and by what mechanism should landowners be allowed to exclude, in advance, unannounced visitors?...All the justices in Watchtower assume that an individual Stratton homeowner, apart from the ordinance, has the right to exclude all soliticitors (religious, political, or commercial) by posting a "No Trespassing" or "No Soliciting" sign."

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit