How did you make that determination?
The Nordyke decision takes into account a "heightened" level of scrutiny and decided, based on that level, that the county had the power to deny use of its buildings to gun shows.
Without the determination of what the proper level of scrutiny is, it would not be possible to decide the limits of the county's power.
An appeal of Nordyke, by the Nordykes, should result in the Supreme Court finding that such a fundamental right as described in Nordyke is deserving of the highest level of scrutiny, called "strict scrutiny".
Does anybody think the county could outlaw book shows and require some showing by various groups that their books do not offend?
How, then, can you claim that the determination of incorporation and the level of scrutiny required is simply "dicta". What would the decision look like if you omitted what you claim is dicta?
I have been persuaded by a fellow (smarter?) lawyer that I may be wrong about the dicta issue. It’s like to be raised by the opponents later, and has some moderating effect, but I’ll yield on the question.