The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling overturned a December 1999 permanent injunction by a Honolulu federal court judge that has allowed the weekly to be placed in racks like those for Honolulu's two daily newspapers but with the coin mechanisms disabled.

The city had wanted to restrict the weekly to smaller slots intended for free publications.

"This is delightful news," said University of Hawaii law professor Jon Van Dyke, who represented the city in the case. "The city's goal is simply to promote distribution of publications in a way that will also promote public safety, pedestrian movement and aesthetic beauty," Van Dyke said.

City spokeswoman Carol Costa, a defendant in the original suit along with Mayor Jeremy Harris, said officials are pleased with the ruling but had no immediate comment on how it would affect current arrangements for publication distribution on Waikiki.

The Waikiki boxes now used by the weekly were allotted in a June lottery for three years. They are alongside similar racks for The Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.

Honolulu Weekly was caught by surprise by the reversal of the injunction.

"This is just really dumb," said Kate Paine, distribution manager. She said that in the more than two years since the injunction, the city and publishers have worked out an arrangement that works for all publications involved.

"We didn't expect this to happen," she said. "For the injunction to be turned around is a step backwards." Honolulu Weekly's lawyer was out of town, so there was no immediate word on whether the publication would appeal.

The 1999 news rack ordinance followed long discussions that included proposals to eliminate distribution of publications on Waikiki sidewalks altogether. The city maintained that putting the free Honolulu Weekly in the coin boxes designed for larger newspapers would lead to a visual blight and wasted space.

Honolulu Weekly convinced U.S. District Court Judge Susan Oki Mollway that it was a violation of the First Amendment for the city to treat publications differently simply because they charged their readers.

The appeals court, in overruling Mollway, ordered "summary judgment completely in favor of the city," saying no First Amendment rights were violated.

It said the ordinance is not based on content of publications, is not designed to serve a narrow government interests and gives publications ample alternatives for distribution in Waikiki and elsewhere.

Both sides will pay their own legal costs.