Westfield Galleria policy unconstitutional
A state appeals court has ruled that Westfield Galleria at Roseville’s policy limiting shoppers’ conversations with strangers about potentially controversial topics such as religion and politics is a restriction of free speech.
The 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento decided that the mall’s rules regarding such conversations and another rule that prohibits shoppers from wearing clothes with religious or political messages are unconstitutionally vague and restrictive of free speech.
The case involves a youth pastor who was arrested in 2007 at the Galleria after talking to two other shoppers about his religious beliefs. The shoppers agreed to the conversation. However, a store employee who overheard the conversation that Matthew Snatchko was having with the shoppers complained and called the mall’s security guards. Charges were later dropped, but the Pacific Justice Institute sued, challenging the Galleria’s policy.
Galleria owner Westfield LLC is disappointed by the ruling and considering legal options, a spokeswoman said.
“Westfield has spent considerable time and effort, including working with legal counsel, to adopt reasonable rules governing conduct in our shopping centers,” spokeswoman Catharine Dickey wrote in an e-mail. “These rules protect our tenants and the thousands of customers at the mall each day by ensuring a safe and secure shopping, dining and entertainment environment while recognizing the requirements of California law. In particular, the rules recognize the right of the public to engage in expressive activity in our common areas, subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions as required by California law. These rules and procedures are, and have been, applied on a content-neutral basis for hundreds of individuals and organizations in our shopping centers each year.”
Westfield will consider appealing to the California Supreme Court, she said.
The appeals court decided that Snatchko could collect damages and attorneys’ fees. The trial court is responsible for implementing the appeals court ruling.
“We are very pleased with this landmark ruling by the California Court of Appeal that vindicates the right to engage in casual conversations about faith without fear of being arrested,” Brad Dacus, Pacific Justice Institute president, said in a news release. “This is a great victory for free speech and common sense.”
Timothy Smith, a Pacific Justice Institute affiliate attorney who is with the Sacramento law firm of McKinley & Smith, served as lead counsel for Snatchko pro bono.