"This debate amply captures the tension between two familiar antagonists: the right to regulate one's own private property and the right to keep and bear arms," the Supreme Court opinion said.

"We read the language of (the state law) to indicate that the Legislature has purposefully declined to give the right to keep and bear arms absolute pre-eminence over the right to regulate one's own private property," the ruling said.

Mike O'Brien, who represented several businesses that sided with AOL and filed a friend-of-the-court brief, said his clients are pleased.

"Obviously, we think it's the right result. Obviously, employers should be able to choose on this issue," O'Brien said. "We don't say ban guns or allow them — we just say employers should be allowed to choose, and this decision allows employers to make this choice."

O'Brien said the issue could be revisited by the Legislature, and any changes might spark a flurry of new lawsuits.

"There are very strong private property interests up at the Legislature, but also strong gun interests," O'Brien said. "There could be a very interesting clash of those interests."

Rob Sykes, an attorney representing the three former AOL workers, said his clients are "saddened" by the ruling.

"We respect the courts but have to disagree with them on that particular decision," Sykes said.

---

E-mail: lindat@desnews.com