Does a snowboarder's blind spot give a ski resort the right to ban him from public land?
It's a question under federal review in the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, which heard arguments Tuesday from a group of snowboarders arguing for the right to rip and shred on the slopes of a Utah ski resort.
Lawyers for the Alta Ski Area east of Salt Lake City told the court that they are not biased against snowboarders -- just their equipment. They say snowboarders are welcome, if they use skis.
The private resort Alta is one of only three nationwide that ban snowboarding.
One judge asked if snowboarders could prove that they don't have a blind spot created by their sideways stance. The snowboarders' lawyer didn't say, but he argued that snowboarding doesn't endanger skiers.
The lawsuit, filed in early 2014, brought renewed attention to the long-festering culture clash between skiers and snowboarders on the slopes. Only two other U.S. resorts ban snowboarding: Deer Valley in Utah and Mad River Glen in Vermont.
Alta lawyers say resort officials made a business decision to lure skiers with the promise of a snowboarder-free experience, and it's well within its rights to keep snowboards off the slopes. The U.S. Forest Service, which approved a permit for Alta, has backed the ski area in the court battle.
SportsWrap
The top sports headlines of the day
The four snowboarders and their attorneys say Alta does not have the right to keep snowboarders off public land designated by Congress for skiing and other sports. They point to 119 other ski resorts that operate on public land and allow snowboarding.
The boarders' attorneys call Alta's ban is irrational and based on stereotypes of snowboarders. They appealed after a federal judge in Utah dismissed the case last year.
That judge said snowboarders don't have a constitutional right to practice their sport and that allowing the lawsuit would open a door for others to claim discrimination against private companies.
