University and Community College System of Nevada and Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County v. Nevadans for Sound Government

Summary

The Supreme Court of Nevada reviewed a preliminary injunction concerning restrictions imposed by the University and Community College System of Nevada and the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County on petition-circulating activities on government property. The court held that the challenged restrictions were generally reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions in limited public or nonpublic forums under the First Amendment. It further held that some RTC guideline provisions were impermissible under Nevada Revised Statutes § 293.127565, while the statute did not prohibit enforcement of UNLV's expressive-activities policy.

Holdings

1. The RTC CitiCenter is a limited public forum because it is primarily a transportation facility, not designed for expressive activities, and NRS 293.127565 created only a limited right for petition circulators. UNLV's campus is also a limited public forum with designated areas for expressive activities.
2. The RTC and UCCSN time, place, and manner restrictions are constitutionally permissible under the First Amendment because they are viewpoint neutral, reasonable in light of the forums' purposes, and serve legitimate government interests in safety and operational efficiency.
3. NRS 293.127565 does not apply to UNLV's Ham Hall when it is physically occupied by a private party for a private event, because the statute only applies to buildings 'occupied by the government' at the time of the intended signature gathering.
4. Under NRS 293.127565, the RTC's three-day advance notice requirement and its provision allowing placement of designated areas completely avoidable by the public are unreasonable restrictions that deny petition circulators their statutory right to gather signatures.
5. The enforcement of the RTC's requirement that NSG sign the request form agreeing to the guidelines was unreasonable because it would have required NSG to consent to the validity of the three-day notice and avoidable-area provisions that are themselves unreasonable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred in finding appellants' time, place, and manner restrictions violated respondent's First Amendment rights
2. Whether the district court erred in determining NRS 293.127565 applied to UNLV's Ham Hall during a private event
3. Whether certain RTC guidelines unreasonably denied NSG's statutory rights under NRS 293.127565
4. Whether the appeal was moot

Disposition

affirmed_in_part_reversed_in_part