Mirage

FN4. As the vice president and general counsel of the Mirage testified, the sidewalks are used by: "Guests of the Mirage and Treasure Island. People who live in Las Vegas and want to come to Treasure Island and the Mirage. People who are guests of other properties and want to go from one property to another on our side of the [Strip].... Whether you were a resident, whether your were a visitor, whether you were a guest, whether you were a business person, you would move on that sidewalk."

FN5. Kokinda, 497 U.S. at 727-28, 110 S.Ct. 3115 (emphasizing that the use of a sidewalk as a "public passageway" or "thoroughfare" to "facilitate the daily commerce and life of the neighborhood or city" are the characteristics of sidewalks that are traditional public forums).

FN6. Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474, 480, 108 S.Ct. 2495, 101 L.Ed.2d 420 (1988).

FN7. Id. at 480, 108 S.Ct. 2495 (quoting Hague, 307 U.S. at 515, 59 S.Ct. 954).

FN8. Indeed, it is the central location of the sidewalks and their use as commercial arteries that distinguishes them from the private walkways considered in the cases relied on by the majority. The cases cited by the majority instead deal with walkways abutting private access roads, private parking lots, or other private grounds. Unlike the sidewalks at issue here, none of the cases cited consider a walkway that abuts a city's most commercially important boulevard and that functions as a critical pedestrian thoroughfare along that boulevard.