[joshuamorton]

There's another thing that I think is often glossed over in discussions of Marsh v. Alabama (I'm not a lawyer though, and Ken is probably smarter than me anyhow).

But that is that Marsh v. Alabama had the company wanting to use a state law to kick people out (and this was repeated with the California case Pruneyard). "The state doesn't need to actively help you kick people exercising their 1A rights in a place you don't want them to" is very, very different from "The state can prevent you from exercising your own autonomy to prevent someone from re-accessing your property".

If the company town put up a fence and a gate, they wouldn't be forced to let anyone in.