https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.html https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.htm... >...we have recognized that the p

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.html https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.htm... >...we have recognized that the preservation of a free society is so far dependent upon the right of each individual citizen to receive such literature as he himself might desire... can those people who live in or come to Chickasaw be denied freedom of press and religion simply because a single company has legal title to all the town? For it is the State's contention that the mere fact that all the property interests in the town are held by a single company is enough to give that company power, enforceable by a state statute, to abridge these freedoms. We do not agree that the corporation's property interests settle the question... Ownership does not always mean absolute dominion. The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.