Oregon Advisory Opinions August 21, 1968: OAG 68-124 (August 21, 1968)
Collection: Oregon Attorney General Opinions
Docket: OAG 68-124
Date: Aug. 21, 1968
Advisory Opinion Text
OAG 68-124.
Representative Packwood, a candidate for United States Senator at the general election to be held November 6, 1968, has inquired as to whether or not the Oregon State Fair Commission has the constitutional power to limit an individual, whether or not he is an exhibitor, from passing out political handbills so long as such distribution does not interfere with the protection, safety or well being of fair goers and participants.
Since Representative Packwood's request does not concern either pending or proposed legislation he would, strictly speaking, not be entitled to receive an opinion from this office on the question posed. However in view of his contention that the commission is denying him a right guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and the public importance of the question presented, we have decided to treat this as a request for opinion from the Oregon State Fair Commission.
We gather from Representative Packwood's letter that what he has in mind is to have members of his campaign team mingle among the fair goers throughout the area of the
fairgrounds, passing out political handbills. Also we assume that when he mentions "constitutional power" he is referring to the freedom of speech right guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Oregon State Fair Commission has of course the statutory authority to enact rules and regulations and to appoint marshals to insure the orderly conduct of the state fair. ORS chapter 565.
Mr. Packwood apparently has no quarrel with the authority of the commission to restrict the dissemination of political handbills if the commission determines that such activity does interfere with the protection, safety or well being of fair goers and participants. We agree that these standards are guidelines upon which the commission may base its action.
Further, we note that the United States Supreme Court in a recent decision on May 20, 1968 (Amalgamated Food Employees Local 590 et al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., et al., (1968) _____ U.S. _____, 20 L.Ed. (2d) 603, 613, said:
The statutes must be regarded as imposing on the Oregon State Fair Commission the responsibility of determining which measures are reasonably necessary to prevent interference within the use of the fairgrounds for conducting a fair thereon." * * * Even where municipal or state property is open to the public generally, the exercise of First Amendment rights may be regulated so as to prevent interference with the use to which the property is ordinarily put by the State . * * * " (Emphasis supplied)
Most reasonable minds would agree that a multitude of political campaign workers representing various candidates, parties and issues standing or moving through the walkways at the fairgrounds, passing out campaign literature, could place a burden upon the free movement and full enjoyment of the public who pay an admission fee to gain entrance and expect to be free of this type of interference to enjoy the usual pastimes at a state fair, except at or adjacent to the usual and customary political booths of the various candidates and political parties. Thus we recognize the commission's discretion to reasonably control and restrict the places on the fairgrounds where such dissemination of political literature may take place.
We have not been informed as to what precise action, if any, is contemplated by the fair commission. We simply advise the commission that any regulations which would not unreasonably deny a person the opportunity to distribute his literature, although restrictive as to location, would appear lawful.