Published Friday, August 11, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury
News
Firearm ban attacked
Gun show operators tell judges county law violates free
speech
BY DAVID HOLBROOK
Contra Costa Times
Foes of an Alameda County law banning guns on county-owned
property told a federal appeals court Thursday the law
violates free speech rights of people who attend gun shows
at the fairgrounds.
In a hearing on an injunction against the county before a
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel, attorney Don Kilmer
said the law takes an unfair, roundabout swing at the shows
by banning gun possession rather than the shows themselves.
Santa Clara County’s outright ban of gun shows failed in the
courts.
Instead, the Alameda County ordinance bans gun possession on
all county-owned property, from parks to parking lots.
Kilmer, who represents a gun show promoter, said the law
violates the rights of gun enthusiasts who attend shows for
their mix of commerce and Second Amendment revelry.
When the judges asked if activists could satisfy their
free-speech rights using pictures of guns, Kilmer said he
didn’t expect Alameda County to “convey the message of the
county fair with pictures of pigs and corn.”
The case before the appellate panel was filed by Russ and
Sallie Nordyke, who operate gun shows throughout Northern
California. The couple successfully challenged Santa Clara
County’s 1996 ban on gun shows, and now they’re challenging
Alameda County’s ordinance.
Supervisor Mary King championed the 1999 law, arguing the
county shouldn’t tolerate gun sales on its property when
firearms have killed or injured so many of its residents.
The law prompted passage of similar ordinances in Sonoma and
Los Angeles counties.
Attorney Sayre Weaver, who represents Alameda County, cited
several cases she claimed showed the county has the right to
ban guns on its property, including a landmark West
Hollywood case that allowed cities to ban cheap handguns.
Regarding Kilmer’s free-speech argument, Weaver cited a
ruling that allowed Honolulu to ban street sales of
merchandise that included T-shirts with religious messages.
The Nordyke case arrived at the appellate court after a U.S.
District Court judge determined Alameda County’s ban stood a
good chance of prevailing at trial.
The judge denied the Nordykes’ bid for an injunction that
would let them hold gun shows at the fairgrounds in
Pleasanton until the matter was settled.
Regardless of the 9th Circuit’s pending decision on the
injunction, the case could still go to trial.
The judges questioned both sides, focusing on how state law
relates to a local government’s authority to regulate
firearms. One judge said he believed the West Hollywood case
presented a big obstacle for the Nordykes, because it set
the precedent for local governments to enact stricter
regulations than state law provides.
“If it’s OK to have local regulations of sales, then why
isn’t it OK to have local regulations on possession?” asked
Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.
Kilmer told the three-judge panel it should differentiate
between laws intended to regulate commerce and those, such
as the county’s, that restrict an individual’s right to bear
arms.
Los Angeles officials also appeared before the panel
Thursday to defend their law, which differs from Alameda
County’s in that it bans gun sales at the county
fairgrounds.
The ordinance is being challenged by another gun-show
operator, whose show at the Pomona fairgrounds is the
world’s largest