Judge Upholds Clark County Ban on Stopping on Vegas Strip Pedestrian Bridges

A federal judge has upheld Clark County’s controversial ban on stopping or standing on pedestrian bridges along or around the Las Vegas Strip, rejecting an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenge that argued the rule violates constitutional protections.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer Dorsey issued the ruling on Sept. 25, concluding that the ordinance does not interfere with protected speech or prevent people from exercising their civil rights.

‘Pedestrian Flow Zone’ Ordinance

The ordinance—passed by the Clark County Commission in January 2024—made it a misdemeanor to “stop, stand, or do something to cause someone to stop or stand” on any of the elevated pedestrian bridges crossing over or near Las Vegas Boulevard. Violations carry penalties of up to six months in jail and/or $1,000 in fines.

“The bridges were not designed for pedestrians to stop, stand or congregate,” Clark County Counsel Lisa Logsdon explained at the time. “The pedestrian flow zone is similar to pedestrian zones located in other large cities, such as New York City.”

The law quickly earned the nickname “Strip Selfie Ban,” reflecting widespread concern that tourists would be targeted for stopping on bridges to take photos.

Public Safety vs. Selective Enforcement

Both Clark County, which holds jurisdiction over the Strip, and the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department stated that selfie-taking tourists would not be targeted. Officials indicated the rule is primarily designed to deter unlicensed street vendors and unpermitted performers.

In the time since the ordinance took effect in early 2024, no individual is known to have been arrested solely for stopping on a bridge to take a photograph. However, taking photos is not explicitly exempted under the text of the law.

The sole exception in the ordinance allows pedestrians to stop while waiting for an elevator or escalator.

Legal Challenge by ACLU

The ACLU of Nevada challenged the ordinance in February 2024 on behalf of two plaintiffs: Brandon Summers, a violinist who has performed for tips on the Strip since 2009, and Lisa McAllister, a wheelchair user who said the ordinance could criminalize her need to pause on bridges whenever her arms grow tired.

The organization argued that the law is “unconstitutionally vague” and fails to accommodate protected First Amendment activities, including political sign‑holding, street performance, or simply stopping to take a photograph.

The ACLU described the ordinance as “the most extreme regulation brought forward in years,” contending that it criminalizes everyday pedestrian behavior and gives law enforcement excessive discretion.

It also argued that, because the ordinance invites selective and discriminatory enforcement, it violates the 14th Amendment.

Restricting Movement vs. Free Speech

In her ruling, Dorsey acknowledged that the ordinance is restrictive but held that it remains within constitutional limits. She wrote that the rule “does not prevent any speech-related conduct that can be done while moving, and it legitimately reaches other unprotected conduct like sleeping, loitering, and vending.”

While noting the county could have adopted narrower restrictions—such as limiting the ban to specific peak hours or congested bridges—Dorsey concluded that the ordinance “does not substantially burden speech and is not broader than necessary to achieve the government’s interest” in managing crowd safety.

The ACLU filed a notice of appeal on Oct. 4, sending the case to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.