Lawsuit Over Postal Regulation Banning Solicitations on Post Office Sidewalks Still Alive
“The lawsuit filed in 2000 over a postal regulation that bars petitioning on internal post office sidewalks is the oldest pending lawsuit that affects minor party and independent candidates. Although there hasn’t been much news about the case in some time, it is alive and well. It is called Initiative & Referendum Institute v US Postal Service, and is in US District Court in Washington, DC. The judge has asked both sides to cooperate in producing additional evidence. Although much evidence has already been submitted, Judge Richard Roberts wants more.” source: Ballot Access News
A little background on this case:
In 2003 USPS released the following:
On December 31, 2003, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued its decision in Initiative and Referendum Institute v. United States Postal Service. The case challenged the constitutionality of the Postal Service’s prohibition against solicitation of signatures for petitions, polls, and surveys on Postal Service property (see POM 124.54a). The court found that the prohibition was constitutional. Therefore the prohibition is in full force and effect. The court’s decision was conditioned on publication of clarifying information about the regulation, in accordance with the Postal Service’s previous offer to do so.
But Ballot Access News reported:
On August 9, 2005 the US Court of Appeals, DC circuit, issued its opinion in Initiative and Referendum Institute v US Postal Service, 04-5045. By a vote of 3-0, that Court ruled that at least some post office sidewalks are public fora. They also concluded that petitioning cannot be banned on such sidewalks. These would be sidewalks that people would use, even if they weren’t going to the post office building itself. They would be sidewalks that are parallel to streets.
The Court of Appeals remanded the case back to the US District Court (which had upheld the postal regulation) to determine whether a substantial portion of all post office-owned sidewalks are the type of sidewalks that are parallel to streets. If the answer is “yes”, then the postal regulation is unconstitutional on its face. It seems obvious that the answer will be “yes”.
The court did not say that the interior sidewalks are necessarily off-limits to petitioning. This has not been decided yet. The decision will be in effect when the government’s 45-day period to ask for a rehearing is up (Sep. 23).
March 27th, 2007 at 10:55 am
The sidewalks that abut the curb of a street are public sidewalks and individuals can solicit for petitions as long as they do not obstruct access to the post office. So how can the regulation which is also United States Code or law, be unconstitutional when it covers public sidewalks? It appears that some individuals are parsing the language ala Bill Clinton asking what the definition of is is. The post office DOES NOT own the public sidewalk. If one checks the Us Code and the regulation, they will see that this is covered. I think these bleeding heart liberals need to be shipped to Iraq so they can learn what real democracy is.
April 4th, 2007 at 6:44 am
I think you neo-nazi warmongers should go.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:00 am
I fell on public sidewalk,which USPS,does snow removal and picks up broken glass.Carriers have to use sidewalk to return to main PO.0wcp,said this is not part of the premises.