Originally Posted by
MikeMpls
You're quoting from a concurring opinion (not the majority opinion) on the solicitation issue.
The leafletting issue was directly addressed in the other decision.
The concurring opinion is controlling on the issue of regulations for leafleting.
It was a 4-4-1 decision. 4 judges found it was a nonpublic forum and that the Port Authority's ban on leafleting was constitutional. 4 judges found that it was a public forum and the ban was thus unconstitutional. Justice O'Connor agreed with the first four, finding that it was a nonpublic forum. But she agreed with the other 4 in finding that the restriction in place by the Port Authority was unconstitutional. Thus, there's a majority who find that an airport is a nonpublic forum and there can be restrictions on speech and there's also a majority who found that a total ban on leafleting is unconstitutional. Because O'Connor's concurrence is the decision that comports with both those holdings it is controlling.