## Facts

- The Texas Review Society (TRS) was a registered student organization at the University of Texas at Austin (UT) associated with conservative political views.
- TRS published a student opinion journal, the *Texas Review*, which included paid advertisements.
- UT applied an institutional “no solicitation” rule to a high-traffic campus area known as the West Mall.
- UT treated the hand-to-hand distribution or sale of newspapers and periodicals containing advertisements in the West Mall as prohibited solicitation.
- Under UT’s policy as applied, advertising-supported student newspapers could still be distributed on campus, but only in two designated locations and only through unmanned racks or vending machines rather than personal distribution from a West Mall table.
- TRS used a table in the West Mall to recruit members, speak with students, and distribute its publication; it argued that requiring rack distribution reduced the number of copies it could circulate.
- UT defended the restriction as a means to limit commercial solicitation directed at students and to manage activity in a congested area.
- At trial, evidence indicated UT was not enforcing the rule selectively and was not targeting TRS based on its political views.
- TRS sued UT officials seeking a permanent injunction barring enforcement of the West Mall restriction, asserting First Amendment and parallel Texas constitutional claims; TRS abandoned a separate unequal-treatment theory at trial.

## Issues

1. Whether UT’s West Mall restriction barring hand-to-hand distribution of an advertising-supported student newspaper, while allowing distribution through racks or vending machines in designated locations, violated the First Amendment as applied to TRS.
2. Whether the same restriction violated Article I, §§ 8 or 27 of the Texas Constitution.

## Decision

- The court entered judgment for the defendants and denied the requested permanent injunction.
- The court upheld UT’s West Mall rule as a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction.
- The court found UT had a substantial interest in limiting commercial solicitation on campus and managing activity in the West Mall.
- The court held the rule left open adequate alternative channels because TRS could distribute its paper through racks or vending machines in designated areas rather than by hand distribution in the West Mall.
- The court rejected the Texas constitutional claims on the record presented, concluding they did not provide broader protection than the First Amendment for this dispute.

## Legal Principles

- In campus areas open for expressive activity, a public university may impose content-neutral time, place, and manner limits that serve a significant governmental interest, are reasonably tailored to that interest, and leave open adequate alternative channels for communication.
- A restriction aimed at controlling solicitation activity may be treated as content-neutral when it is justified without reference to viewpoint and is not enforced selectively against a speaker.
- The First Amendment does not guarantee a speaker the most effective method of distribution; limits that reduce circulation do not by themselves establish a constitutional violation when reasonable alternative means of reaching the audience remain available.
- Parallel free-speech and assembly provisions of the Texas Constitution may be treated as coextensive with the First Amendment where no separate state-law basis is shown for broader relief.

## Conclusion

The court upheld UT Austin’s West Mall no-solicitation restriction as applied to TRS’s advertising-supported student newspaper, concluding that limiting hand-to-hand distribution in that area while allowing distribution through racks or vending machines in designated locations was a content-neutral time, place, and manner regulation that served the university’s interests and left adequate alternative channels, and it denied injunctive relief under both federal and Texas constitutional theories.


Texas Review Society v. Cunningham, 659 F. Supp. 1239 (1987)