A man sleeps beneath a tree at Huntridge Circle Park on Monday afternoon while meals are handed out at a nearby table. Photos by Ralph Fountain. Gail Sacco, left, prepares cups of water to hand out with the meals she brought to homeless and indigent people Monday afternoon at Huntridge Circle Park on Maryland Parkway.

Three days before Thanksgiving, a U.S. District Court judge provided Las Vegas' homeless and indigent population a reason to celebrate the holiday.

Judge Robert Jones ruled Monday that the Las Vegas ordinance prohibiting the distribution of food in public parks is unconstitutional because it targets a specific segment of the population.

"This is one thing the homeless and indigent can really give thanks for. A federal judge went out of his way days before Thanksgiving to protect their rights," attorney Robert Murdock said after a hearing during which Jones directed the city to redraft its ordinance.

The American Civil Liberties Union and homeless-advocate groups had challenged the city's four-month-old ordinance, arguing the law was vague and targeted poor residents who rely on handouts to survive.

While acknowledging the city's intent was to keep parks clean and safe, Jones questioned why giving a single homeless person a sandwich is a criminal act.

"The statute goes too far," Jones said. "I don't think you could limit a person's right ... to hand out sandwiches to one, two, three, four or five people."

Jones gave both sides 10 days to submit in writing their arguments for and against the ordinance. He then will issue a final order.

Jones' message was interpreted differently by activists and Las Vegas City Attorney Brad Jerbic.

Jerbic said he thinks the city can redraft a law and still include language targeting indigents. If the city can prove a certain number of indigents at a feeding puts a burden on city services -- because of trash such as needles and used condoms -- the judge will be appeased, Jerbic said. The Las Vegas City Council will decide on that number.

"I am heartened the court recognized there is a serious problem and has given the city some guidance on how to amend the ordinance so we can address the problem," Jerbic said. "We have every right to regulate that activity. We have every right, as a government, to regulate the park."

But Allen Lichtenstein, an attorney with the ACLU, said the judge sided with his organization's contention that to prohibit a certain portion of the population from public areas is unconstitutional.

"The city is targeting poor people because the poor people are unsightly people, and they don't want them around," Lichtenstein said. "He (Jones) said you can't ban those people, which is what we've said all along."

The city can regulate the number of people who gather at a park, attorneys said, but that will apply to all types of events, including church gatherings, family reunions or birthday parties.

If the city crafts a new ordinance that still targets indigents, it will end up back in court, Murdock said.

Lee Rowland, also an attorney with the ACLU, told Jones the city is using stereotypes based on appearances when it determines who is considered indigent.

"This is a criminal sanction; they (donors) have a criminal record for misgauging the income of someone they're sharing a pie with," Rowland said.

What became clear Monday is that activists such as Gail Sacco can return to feeding the homeless and indigent without worrying about citations.

She scoffed at the city's contention that homeless people are responsible for leaving trash, like beer bottles and needles, in the park.

"Anything that is criminal behavior, we've told them before, arrest them," said Sacco, who has been cited twice in the past two years for feeding the homeless. "Poor people eating in a public park should not be a crime. It just doesn't make sense; it's pitiful."

Jerbic said city leaders approved the ordinance to protect indigent residents, not hurt them.

He argued that group feedings "lure" the homeless away from social services. Other organizations and agencies provide free food and shelter if drugs and alcohol are ditched at the door.

"Nothing changes what we're trying to do, and that's to get these less fortunate people into social service centers, faith-based centers, so the professionals will be able to transition them back into the community," Mayor Oscar Goodman said.

Goodman acknowledged that the case was not the first time the ACLU has successfully challenged a city ordinance on constitutional grounds.

"It probably won't be the last," he added.

But he added that City Council members listened to the city attorney's office for advice.

"Talk to Mr. Jerbic about why his ordinances are declared unconstitutional," said Goodman, a former criminal defense attorney. "We rely on our city attorney. I'm not practicing law up there. I trust the city attorney."

Jerbic said he found two times in the past 14 years in which the ACLU challenged city ordinances successfully and another time when the organization unsuccessfully challenged the city.

"Two out of three lawsuits in the last 14 years hardly sounds like a string of pearls to me," Jerbic said.

Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, questioned the true intention of the city's latest ordinance. He cited sweeps conducted by the city that drove the homeless from the social services corridor.

"This is a shell game that has absolutely no credibility whatsoever," Peck said. "All they're doing is pushing these people around."

He noted the timing of the court's decision. Government agencies regularly promote their free Thanksgiving meals at homeless shelters.

"I have no doubt that we are doing to see displays of 'compassion for the poor' on the part of the city on Thanksgiving so long as nobody has to look at them and most of us don't have to deal with them," he said.

"The real actions against the poor is evidenced by what was said in court."

Since the ordinance took effect, several summonses have been handed out by city marshals at parks in the downtown area, several miles from the Strip.

One Municipal Court judge tossed out a misdemeanor case against a California activist last month and called the ordinance unconstitutionally vague. The judge said the measure denied equal protection of the law to all citizens.

A final ruling by Jones in the Sacco vs. City of Las Vegas case is expected to affect several similar cases pending in Municipal Court.

Review-Journal writer David McGrath Schwartz and The Associated Press contributed to this report.