NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FEB 18 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR No. 06-56660
KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS OF
CALIFORNIA, INC., a California D.C. No. CV-03-00293-CBM
nonprofit religious corporation; EMIL
BECA, one of its individual members,
MEMORANDUM*
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a California
municipal corporation; STEPHEN YEE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Consuelo B. Marshall, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submission Deferred July 22, 2010**
Resubmitted February 13, 2015
Pasadena, California
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
1
Before: PREGERSON, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
On July 22, 2010, we withheld submission of this case pending final
resolution of proceedings in International Society for Krishna Consciousness of
California, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, No. 01-56579/12-56621(“ISKCON I”). On
August 20, 2014, this court resolved ISKCON I. Therefore, this case is resubmitted
and the judgment entered in ISKCON I applies to this case, International Society
for Krishna Consciousness of California, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, No. 06-56660
(“ISKCON II”).
In ISKCON I, this court addressed whether § 23.27(c) of the Los Angeles
Administrative Code–which bans continuous or repetitive solicitation for the
immediate receipt of funds at LAX–is a reasonable restriction on protected speech
under the First Amendment. ISKCON v. City of Los Angeles, 764 F.3d 1044, 1046
(9th Cir. 2014). This court held that § 23.27(c) is a reasonable restriction on
protected speech under the First Amendment because it “is limited in nature and
leaves open alternative channels for ISKCON to raise money.” Id. at 1055.
In ISKCON II, we are asked to decide whether § 171.07 of the Los Angeles
Municipal Code–which requires groups, including ISKCON, to obtain permits to
solicit and receive funds in designated areas within airport terminals–violates the
First Amendment. Because this court has upheld § 23.27(c), a more restrictive
2
ordinance than § 171.07, as a reasonable restriction on protected speech under the
First Amendment, we hold that § 171.07 is likewise a reasonable restriction on
protected speech under the First Amendment.
The district court’s summary judgment in favor of Defendants is
AFFIRMED.
3