Jeff Jeff Jeff........Sigh...I'm having flashbacks to my con law class. In a nutshell, a major part of the problem is that the mall, a commercial stablishment holding itself open to the public, has invited the state (in the form of police officers) to abridge the constitutionally protected rights of a citizen.
If I had to guess, the mall is on state owned property they lease to the commercial establishment which further supports the public forum argument. In any event, think about your first premise: If a private enterprise can retsrict constitutionally protected freedoms what is to stop them from not allowing anyone in if they're wearing a yarmulka. Its a slippery slope. There are some restrictions that have been upheld such as right to assembly and gang members congregating in malls or other public places, but there must be a compelling reason.
Any way...you get a chance to see if you had a carrera tailight lense in OK condition? Passenger side...
