Court Opinion

ID: 9794968
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:15:07.066041+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:22:37.239828
License: Public Domain

BURKE, J., Dissenting.
In my view the city ordinance provision in question is entirely reasonable and constitutes a necessary -and proper exercise of the police power of a city.1
It seeks to prbvent occurrences in highly volatile, sensitive areas of public terminals by preventing unnecessary loitering or remaining in such terminals by persons who have no legitimate business being there.
■’It should not be necessary to await a disturbance, interference, riot, theft, pickpocketing, baggage • snatching, blocking passage, soliciting for improper purposes or interference with the- business ’ of the common carriers involved, before a valid municipal interest arises to warrant the enactment or enforcement of the ordinance here involved.2
Airports, railway stations, and bus depots — and their patrons^-are faced with problems peculiar to themselves and not common to those of public streets, parks, playgrounds, libraries, museums, zoos', theaters, auditoriums, or public restrooms. As one reflects upon each of the kinds of places mentioned one realizes that each has ’ its sensitive areas and *855requires a body of law to protect the interests of all who are involved in utilizing such .places. ■ Sucltiregulations evolve, as here, over a long period of time and not all reasons for them are as readily apparent as here. The determination of the need for such regulations has been entrusted by law to the appro-' priate governing" boards, and their legislative acts are entitled . to be upheld by the courts unless shown to be arbitrary, capri- ■ cicas, or contrary to law. There is ho' semblance of süch a showing here.
Mass transportation terminals are designed to serve the/ convenience and interest of the traveling public and require the handling of large numbers of persons and baggage. Crowds of friends or relatives meeting passengers,- or seeing them off add to the mass of people frequenting terminals-. Problems of lost luggage and lost persons, including the very '
. elderly, the jsfery young, the halt, lame and blind, are frequent. The mere presence of Travelers Aid desks in common carrier terminals, to lend assistance to those needing it, is indicative that such stations are places where confusion and distractions abound. Often last minute connections must be attempted or ' undue delays endured. The common good demands that unnecessary interferences with the operation of such termn nals be eliminated. That is the proper public purpose sought to be served by the city ordinance in question. ,
It is a matter of common knowledge, which police record's confirm, that" amid the confusion incident to arrivals and departures, luggage ' and purses arei vulnerable to being snatched and pickpockets can and do operate profitably.
Airports, bus depots, and railroad stations are places of 'escape, of rapid ingress and egress "from metropolitan areas, and are often required to be placed under surveillance by federal, state and local police agencies. Other government" agencies such as customs officers, agricultural inspectors,. narcotic law enforcement officers, and health and quarantine officials are often on duty in such terminals.
Furthermore, it is common knowledge that persons frequenting stations, depots and airports are often under heavy emotional stress, being parted from, or united with loved ones.; they are preoccupied with last minute personal communications and deserve what little privacy may be left to them. In some terminals many would-be passengers are waiting on a standby basis, particularly armed forces personnel, not knowing from one minute to the next whether they will be *856leaving or staying. In such situations emotions run high, nerves are taut and conditions are volatile.
Terminals are normally surrounded by broad public sidewalk areas readily available for the exercise of First Amendment rights, the distribution of handbills and like activities. Travelers gain access to the premises or leave by such sidewalks. It does not appear to constitute an unreasonable interference with First Amendment rights to require that persons desiring to exercise such rights withdraw to the public sidewalk areas to contact travelers for their purposes.
The municipal regulation here involved should be upheld as a valid and reasonable approach to the maintenance of law and order and the protection of the traveling public, and not to constitute an undue interference with the exercise of First Amendment rights.
I would deny the writ.
McComb, J., concurred.

 I.e., the portion of the ordinance which makes it unlawful to remain •in any railway station, airport, or bus depot or the grounds for longer than reasonably necessary to .transact business with any common carrier using or occupying such station, airport, or depot.