Mirage Hotel And Casino Las Vegas

FN47. See Culinary Workers Union v. District Court, 66 Nev. 166, 207 P.2d 990 (1949) (holding that picketing was protected by both the First Amendment and the Nevada Constitution); City of Reno v. District Court, 59 Nev. 416, 95 P.2d 994 (1939) (striking down city ordinance banning peaceful picketing as unconstitutional under the First Amendment and the Nevada Constitution); see also Venetian, 45 F.Supp.2d at 1034 n. 4 (recognizing plaintiff's claim that Nevada law provided no greater protection for free speech rights on private property than does the United States Constitution, but declining to rule on the basis of Nevada constitutional law).

FN48. See NLRB v. Calkins, 187 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir.1999) (recognizing that Nevada law does not extend special protection to free speech interests at the expense of a private store owner's property interest).

The majority of courts having virtually identical state constitutional language to Nevada's have interpreted the free speech provisions of their constitutions as coextensive to, but no greater than, that of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. [FN49] We concur with the holding of the majority of state courts and decline to expand the scope of Nevada Constitution Article 1, Section 9.

FN49. See, e.g., Fiesta Mall Venture v. Mecham Recall Comm., 159 Ariz. 371, 767 P.2d 719, 723 (App.1988); Citizens for Ethical Government, Inc. v. Gwinnett Place Assocs., 260 Ga. 245, 392 S.E.2d 8, 9- 10 (1990); Illinois v. DiGuida, 152 Ill.2d 104, 178 Ill.Dec. 80, 604 N.E.2d 336 (1992); State v. Lacey, 465 N.W.2d 537, 540 (Iowa 1991); State v. Wicklund, 589 N.W.2d 793, 799 (Minn.1999); But see Bock v. Westminster Mall Co., 819 P.2d 55 (Colo.1991) (allowing public demonstration in private shopping mall under broad reading of state constitution); Stranahan v. Fred Meyer, Inc., 153 Or.App. 442, 958 P.2d 854 (1998) (adopting a more expansive reading of its state constitutional guarantees of free speech than the federal constitution).