Street fight in courts

The sidewalks along the Las Vegas Strip have touched off another debate over constitutional rights that, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, will land Clark County in court once again.

A county-produced ordinance aimed at banning a practice called "off-premise canvassing" from the resort corridor will be presented to the County Commission on Tuesday.

But it already has ACLU representatives fuming over what they term a feeble attempt on the county's part to comply with the U.S. Ninth District Court of Appeals directive to craft a law that is constitutional.

"It does not change significantly the ordinance that they had before," ACLU attorney Allen Lichtenstein said of the revised law. "They may have played with the language a little, but it has the same constitutional deficiencies."

In January, the court upheld an injunction preventing the county from enforcing the handbill ordinance that was passed two years earlier. The District Court judge ruled the county law prohibited constitutionally protected speech.

The county created the law to keep people from handing out pamphlets -- which often contain risque photographs -- and intimidating visitors walking along the Strip and littering.

While the ACLU has called the ordinance a ruse, Assistant District Attorney Michael Davidson said the revised law accomplishes what the county set out to do: prohibit the distribution of material that promotes commercial businesses.

"This is an important enough issue that we don't plan to roll over," said Davidson, who noted there is a distinction between free speech and commercial speech. "I think this presents public and safety issues."

Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, said Friday that the county's sole intent is to keep smut peddlers off the street and has nothing to do with littering or public safety.

"The court, recognizing what the county was up to, said if you're serious, a good place to start is with pirate shows and volcanoes," Peck said, referring to resort attractions. "Those cause obstructions, littering and people walking in the street, which is unsafe. The reality is that's not what they care about, what they care about is getting rid of smut peddlers." Lichtenstein said a lengthy preamble to the revised ordinance -- a two-page introduction that lists in detail the purpose of the law -- is a "sloppy" attempt to get the public's backing.

The actual ordinance, he said, is as unconstitutional as the original draft and if it is passed Tuesday, it will lead to another unsuccessful court appearance for the county.

"Rather than come up with a constitutional ordinance, they would rather waste taxpayer money re-litigating the same issue with undoubtedly the same results," Lichtenstein said.

"The Supreme Court has said time and time again that public streets are the quintessential public forum."

Lichtenstein said the solution to the county's problem might be to write an ordinance that restricts the time, place and manner in which all pamphlets are distributed on the Strip, rather than a ban.

County attorneys, however, believe they have the solution, and it's in the ordinance they plan to bring to commissioners.

Davidson said aside from rewriting portions about commercial speech, attorneys narrowed the definition of Resort Corridor because the appeals court ruled the prior definition was too broad.

The new corridor will begin at Circus Circus on the Strip and end at Four Seasons Drive near Mandalay Bay. At cross streets, the corridor will extend 150 feet east and west of the Strip. At Convention Center Drive and Paradise Road, it will extend 200 feet west.

Clark County is already being sued by the ACLU for refusing to take down signs that indicate handbilling is still illegal, citing the original ordinance. Lichtenstein said the organization's dealings with the county were initially amicable until county lawyers said the signs would remain on the Strip.

Davidson said the signs would have been removed if the county did not plan to contest the appeals court's decision. He noted that U.S. District Court Judge Lloyd George has yet to issue the injunction the appeals court ordered him to issue. That may occur today during a federal court hearing.

"We crafted the ordinance and hope and believe it will satisfy the Ninth Circuit," Davidson said.

"For us, the question is very simple -- do we spend $10,000 of taxpayers dollars knowing that within a matter of weeks we will have a new ordinance? That doesn't seem like a real good use of taxpayer money."

Peck said he was miffed that the county could craft an ordinance that dictates what can and cannot happen on the Strip's sidewalks when a month ago it claimed civil rights related to sidewalks were too complex.

County attorneys said the District Court should determine whether sidewalks in front of the new Venetian hotel-casino are private or whether protesters could use them during rallies.

"Coming as this does on the heels of the county asserting in the Venetian sidewalks case that it is remaining neutral on the public sidewalks issue, it is apparent they really don't understand the First Amendment and the public's right to free speech on the streets and sidewalks of Las Vegas," Peck said.

archive