[Porsche-O-Phile]

I believe that SCOTUS has upheld the fact that private policies can override constitutionally-protected freedoms. IIRC the ruling in question was over an incident very similar to this, in a shopping mall (perhaps one of the lawyers here or a legal scholar can give the specifics of the case I'm only vaguely remembering from my business law class so long ago. . .)

Anyway, the argument would be (should be?) that the mall, while technically private is functioning in the capacity of a public place. I would suspect that by condoning the rally (or sanctioning it, certainly) the mall might be viewed as functioning more as a public, rather than private place and therefore lose its right to restrict speech that might otherwise be constitutionally protected.

If the mall had been actively trying to boot the entire rally off its property from moment #1 and called security/police to deal with it, I imagine it would be viewed as a private enterprise.