Second, the ban on solicitation and sale of literature for the immediate receipt of funds at MIA is a reasonable response to the County's concerns regarding the risks associated with these activities.
In this case, Dade County asserts that the ban on solicitation and sale of literature throughout MIA was implemented to address repeated instances of abusive conduct and misrepresentations on the part of ISKCON members engaged in solicitation and the sale of literature at MIA.
The Court in
Lee recognized the potential for fraud and coercion as valid reasons for banning solicitation in airports.
Lee, 505 U.S. at 684, 112 S.Ct. 2701 (“[F]ace-to-face solicitation presents risks of duress that are an appropriate target of regulation.”);
id. at 689–90, 112 S.Ct. 2701 (O'Connor, J., concurring). Moreover, as the Court in
Lee explained, solicitation is in many ways inherently incompatible with the primary purpose of an airport—the facilitation of air travel. Solicitation causes delays and disruptions to travelers, who are often heavily laden with baggage and running on tight schedules, and, therefore, is significantly more intrusive than the mere handing out of literature.
See id. at 683–84, 112 S.Ct. 2701;
id. at 689, 112 S.Ct. 2701 (O'Connor, J., concurring). As discussed above, these same concerns apply with equal force to the sale of literature in airport thoroughfares. For the reasons set forth in
Lee, we conclude that the prohibition on solicitation and sale of literature at MIA is a reasonable restriction on speech.