Judge rules again in favor of leafleting

Grace Leong

Friday, April 6, 2001 | 10:57 a.m.

A federal judge, for the second time in three years, has ruled people can distribute leaflets at the Fremont Street Experience and has settled a dispute over whether such activity is a guise for solicitation, which remains banned.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the city of Las Vegas in 1997, alleging city ordinances on leafleting at the city-controlled Fremont Street Experience were unconstitutional and a violation of free speech.

The plaintiffs include ACLU of Nevada, ACLU of Nevada Executive Director Gary Peck, the Shundahai Network -- an anti-nuclear organization that has been allegedly told to leave the street for handing out literature -- and Shundahai member Greg Gable, and the Universalist Unitarian Social Justice Committee and its president, Paul Brown.

The Unitarian committee is a human rights organization that has also allegedly been kicked off the Fremont Street.

The defendants include Fremont Street President Mark Paris.

U.S. District Judge David Hagen, ruling in April 1998 on the ACLU's 1997 lawsuit, issued a temporary injunction allowing the enforcement of a city ordinance prohibiting begging. But he prohibited the enforcement of the leafleting ban and permitted the sale of message-bearing merchandise.

The March 30 order by Hagen made that injunction permanent.

ACLU attorney Allen Lichtenstein noted that the March 30 judgment settles a dispute over whether groups were conducting solicitations under the guise of hand billing and also affirms that the anti-leafleting ban is unconstitutional because it violates both the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Hagen said in Friday's order: "The ACLU should not be able to pass out leaflets in places where pedestrian traffic will be obstructed, but the ordinance in question places a total ban on leafleting, which is unreasonable in light of the purpose and use of the mall, and is unconstitutional.

"Leafleting doesn't entail all of the problems presented by solicitation. ... The distribution of literature does not require that the recipient stop in order to receive the message the speaker wished to convey; instead the recipient is free to read the message at a later time," he said.

Hagen also ruled that a ban on all forms of solicitation is "reasonable in light of the mall's commercial purpose and is a legitimate way to further the city's interests" because potential mall patrons prefer to visit a commercial venue where they will not be stopped and harassed by solicitors asking for money.

Lichtenstein said the March 30 judgment clarifies that while passing out leaflets that ask for donations is considered solicitation, distributing information with contact numbers is not solicitation and is an activity protected by the First Amendment.

"Since leafletting is a constitutionally protected activity, we hope the Fremont Street will become a center for free speech and First Amendment activity," he said. "The First Amendment isn't held hostage to anyone's economic interest, and the concept that the Constitution doesn't apply everywhere in Las Vegas just because some tourists don't like it is a very scary thought."

Lichtenstein said that despite the 1998 ruling, problems have persisted. He said some protesters were threatened with arrest by Fremont Street security guards in 1999 for allegedly passing out anti-nuclear leaflets that contained phone numbers.

Paris disputed this, saying his maintenance and security personnel are regularly schooled by the Fremont Street legal staff and follow the court's rulings.