SALT LAKE CITY — In this city, where nearly half the residents share the same religion, it is hard to imagine a bare-knuckled legal brawl involving the mayor and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Yet the latest round of a dispute over rights to a block of prime downtown land is almost certain to reach the United States Supreme Court in a test of First Amendment rights that also touches on the separation of church and state.
At the center of the fight is the Main Street Plaza, a lovely block of flower beds and fountains that connects the main temple of the church's world headquarters and its main administration building. The site is the most popular tourist attraction in Utah, drawing as many as nine million visitors a year.
But since the church bought the block from the city three years ago for $8.1 million, closing it off to vehicles but not pedestrians, the sides have wrestled over its control. Now the issue is headed for a third legal review, one step away from the United States Supreme Court.
"The issue puts the church and everyone in a difficult position," said Von G. Keetch, a lawyer for the church, which has appealed the case to the full Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Denver. "I don't believe we've ever had a situation in the United States quite like this."
The central question is this: Despite ownership of land sold with a public easement, can the church control what people say and how they behave as they walk through?
In the original deal, the city agreed to ban certain acts that both sides agreed might be offensive, like loitering, committing indecent exposure, distributing literature, picketing and playing loud music. That prompted several Salt Lake City groups and the American Civil Liberties Union to sue the church and the city, contending that any restrictions violated rights of free speech. In early 2001, the lower court sided with the church.
But on appeal, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals in Denver overturned the decision this month, saying the restrictions were illegal and the easement guaranteed the right to a "public forum."
The church immediately appealed to the full court, but unless the city decides to relinquish the easement, the losing side is certain to appeal again, to the Supreme Court.
In the church's view, permitting full rights to free speech has the potential to desecrate the plaza, though church officials say only a small number of people were asked to leave the area before the appeals court ruling. As many as eight were escorted away while the Olympics were taking place in February, Mr. Keetch said, and several dozen since, including a Southern Baptist leader, Kurt Van Gorden, who was arrested in April for trespassing after distributing what he called generic Christian literature.
But no objectionable behavior can be tolerated, Mr. Keetch added, because of the reason the church bought the block in the first place.
"This was to be used as a religious place, a place where brides come out of their wedding to take pictures with their family because it has great religious imagery," he said. "You can't have someone in the background, waving a sign or screaming. The court has now created a full-blown demonstration zone."
Mr. Keetch said the simplest solution was for the city to waive its easement rights. But Mayor Ross Anderson said he would not, and A.C.L.U. lawyers said he could not.
Dani Eyer, the incoming director of the group's Salt Lake City chapter, said a capitulation by the city would violate the rights of non-Mormons, allowing one religious group to determine rules and regulations over what the original sales agreement defined — and the appeals court affirmed — was public property.
Ms. Eyer said that the city could still impose reasonable restrictions, as it did throughout downtown during the Olympics, but that the church was legally barred from setting standards. "It can't come down to, `We can do this, and you can't,' " she said. "The church can't distribute brochures on Mormonism and say someone else can't distribute brochures about Southern Baptists."
Mr. Van Gorden, 48, a former Salt Lake resident who lives in Victorville, Calif., said in an interview that he had distributed his brochures for two days on the plaza before he was arrested. On the first, he said, he walked away after police officers asked him to leave. On the second, he was handcuffed by police officers in business suits, put in a holding cell and fingerprinted before he was released on $138 bail. The trespassing charge was later dropped.
Josh Ewing, Mr. Anderson's spokesman, said the mayor recently met with lawyers and city leaders to devise a compromise that would satisfy the church and the Constitution, but the effort failed.
"There was no way to create restrictions that were constitutional and would give the church the restructuring they thought they bargained for," Mr. Ewing said, adding that a "severability clause" in the original deal would ultimately protect full rights of free speech.
A severability clause, common in contracts, says that if any terms of the deal are ruled illegal, the other terms remain in effect, in this case the easement.
In an effort to avoid further litigation and perhaps settle the appeal, Mr. Ewing said the mayor was now developing "time, manner and place" restrictions that were "content neutral" and were routinely applied to parks and other public places in the city. But even that might not be enough to satisfy the church.
Insisting that the easement was the problem and that the city should relinquish it to the church, Mr. Keetch blamed Mr. Anderson for the mess, saying, "Without the easement on the table, things have become very difficult."