In the case of Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on whether a federal government workplace charity drive could exclude certain advocacy groups from participating. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had excluded legal defense and political advocacy organizations from its Combined Federal Campaign (CFC), an annual charity drive among federal employees. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense and Education Fund (NAACP LDEF) along with other similar organizations sued OPM arguing that their exclusion violated their First Amendment rights to free speech. The court held in a 7-2 decision that while public forums created by the government are subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment, not all publicly funded activities must be treated as such forums. It found that CFC was not intended as a forum for expressive activity but rather as an efficient fundraising mechanism for charities providing direct health and welfare services; thus it did not violate any constitutional rights by excluding advocacy groups like NAACP LDEF.

In the dissenting opinion for Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., Justice William Brennan argued that the majority's decision was a significant departure from established First Amendment jurisprudence. He contended that by allowing government officials to exclude advocacy groups from participating in the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC), a charitable fundraising program for federal employees, based on their political viewpoints, it violated free speech principles. Brennan asserted that CFC is a public forum where all voices should be heard equally without discrimination or censorship. He also criticized the majority's reasoning as inconsistent with previous rulings which held that viewpoint-based exclusions are impermissible unless necessary to serve compelling state interests - something he believed was not demonstrated in this case.