A] statute is narrowly tailored if it targets and eliminates no more than the exact source of the evil it seeks to remedy

—recognizing that "public streets and sidewalks have been used for public assembly and debate, the hallmarks of a traditional public forum

The Supreme Court has determined that an ordinance prohibiting "focused picketing" is appropriately narrowly tailored to serve the government's interest in safeguarding residential privacy.

States are permitted to regulate the time, place, and manner of speech and expression if the regulation is content-neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and the regulation leaves open ample alternative channels of communication.

—upholding an ordinance prohibiting picketing before or about the residence or dwelling of any individual

—"we have repeatedly held that individuals are not required to welcome unwanted speech into their own homes and that the government may protect this freedom."

The State's interest in protecting the well-being, tranquility, and privacy of the home is certainly of the highest order in a free and civilized society

A complete ban can be narrowly tailored but only if each activity within the proscription's scope is an appropriately targeted evil

The First Amendment permits the government to prohibit offensive speech as intrusive when the `captive'audience cannot avoid the objectionable speech

After Linmark, the Supreme Court clarified that an alternative need not be a speaker's first or best choice, but is adequate if it "permits the more general dissemination of a message."