An organization against drunk driving sought permission from the owner of a mall to pass out leaflets in favor of tougher drunk driving laws in front of a liquor store. The mall owner denied the organization permission. The organization, filing an action in an appropriate court, sought an injunction permitting the organization to pass out its leaflets in accord with its free speech rights. The state's highest court, interpreting the state constitution, permits the exercise of free speech rights on private property that is regularly held open to the public. Of the following reasons, which is the best argument for granting the injunction? A. Leafleting is a form of speech that is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
B. The reason for leafleting was related to the place where the organization sought to leaflet.
C. The leafleting was permitted by the state constitution.
D. By admitting members of the general public, the mall constituted a limited public forum.