How many times have you seen a sign like "No shirt, no shoes, no service"? Is that business owner violating the civil rights of barefoot or shirtless people? Legally, the answer is no.

A mall is private property. They can restrict who enters their property if, for example, they believe the person might cause a disturbance. If he refused to leave, then he can be (and apparently was) arrested for trespassing. They can not restrict admission on grounds of race or ethnicity.

The legal issues surrounding free speech at malls have been and likely will continue to be addressed by the courts. Here's a legal paper on the issue as it relates to the Minnesota Supreme Court case State v. Wicklund where the court ruled against free speech protection in public malls. The paper also mentions that the US Supreme Court has held that the standard constitutional protection for political speech does not apply to malls and shopping centers because no state action is involved. Many, though not all, state courts have agreed with the Supreme Court's ruling.

There may be more to the story than meets the eye. According to the police report, there many be more to the story than has been covered in the press. The police report states that the arrested man and a partner were told to leave because they were stopping other shoppers. That's a far cry from being arrested for wearing tee-shirts (that they'd bought at the same mall, ironically). Stopping other shoppers can be seen as harassment.