[Bogey]

There is actually a law severely restricting any business's right to determine who solicits and who doesn't on its premises. As a result, unions can organize without permission and under federal protection if Target or Wal-Mart allow any solicitations on their grounds. Blame the federal government's meddling here, not Target.

---

I was going to offer a similar opinion. I took the opportunity yesterday to thank the manager of the Publix I
shop at, for allowing the SA to put their kettle out.
He told me while they truly supported the organization, sadly, the chain will have numerous threats of lawsuits from every group under the sun, to have the same right.
Another reason for tort reform. I can't say I blame Target.
It's probably more constructive to save the litigation cost and just contribute to the organization.

[supercat]

It's probably more constructive to save the litigation cost and just contribute to the organization.

I wonder if it would be possible for a store to arrange with the Salvation Army to have a store employee ring the bell and collect donations (receiving permission from the Salvation Army to use the appropriate trademarks, with the Salvation Army receiving 100% of proceeds)? If a store did this (at a cost to the store of $80/day or so, which would likely be outweighed by the goodwill such a move could generate) it would totally lay to rest any claims that they selectively allowed solicition since the bell ringers would not be solicitors).