However, I think the court got this one right. I suspect the key element might have been that this was public property, analogous to a public sidewalk.
The public can use a public sidewalk if they don't block driveways, obstruct vehicle or pedestrian traffic, violate noise ordinances, accost people offensively, or otherwise cause a nuisance.
The Satanic Temple people could legally block access to their own leased meeting room, since they had some kind of event contract, but could not legally block access to public areas not covered by their contract. Specifically, they could not bar the public from an outside area (which is where Mrs. Bell had quietly and unobtrusively positioned herself to pray.)
Hence Mrs. Bell was in the right, and Satanic Temple (assuming they instigated the arrest) and the arresting officers were in the wrong.
? That's how I read it, on the basis of the information I have seen.
“this was public property, analogous to a public sidewalk”
It’s not analogous to a sidewalk. There are many different legal classifications for public property, and this wouldn’t fall in the same category as a sidewalk. Sidewalks don’t have hours of operation, areas of restricted access, security guards, etc, like most public buildings do.