Government,
Constitutional Law,
Civil Rights
Sep. 16, 2020
Coalition challenges order to keep fitness clubs closed
State law provides more protections for individual rights than federal law and has a clear standard of judicial review, said Scott J. Street, a partner with Musik Peeler & Garrett LLP in Los Angeles, who filed the lawsuit.
A coalition of fitness clubs have sued Gov. Gavin Newsom, claiming his emergency orders closing gyms violate state law.
The complaint filed Monday by California Fitness Alliance claims the governor's order violates the California Emergency Services Act. It also argues Los Angeles County officials exceeded their authority when they issued their own order on Sept. 4.
Several other gym owners have sued unsuccessfully to block the governor's closure orders. On a conference call with reporters, the group's attorney said this case was different.
"Unlike all of those other cases that have failed, we are challenging government action under state law, which provides more protections for individual rights and which has a clear standard of judicial review," said Scott J. Street, a partner with Musik Peeler & Garrett LLP in Los Angeles. "That is quite frankly not clear under federal constitutional law. ... There is an evidentiary standard by which we can show the government's acts are arbitrary and capricious."
The plaintiffs are seeking to nullify Newsom's March 19 business shutdown order, subsequent state orders and a corresponding Los Angeles County policy. The complaint also names Attorney General Xavier Becerra and several other state and local officials. California Fitness Alliance v. Newsom, 20STCP02962 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Sept. 14, 2020).
Gym owners have filed multiple unsuccessful suits against Newsom's closure policies in federal court. On Oct. 27, U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez will ear the state's arguments to dismiss claims brought by Sean Covell, owner of three Sacramento-area gyms. Covell and another Sacramento gym owner in a separate case have made claims under the First, Fifth and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Best Supplement Guide, LLC v. Newsom, 2:20-cv-00965-JAM-CKD (E.D. Cal., filed May 12, 2020).
By contrast, Street's complaint seeks to argue that over months of frequently changing orders, Newsom has gone beyond the intent of the act.
"The Emergency Services Act does not explicitly give the governor the power to order all Californians to stay inside their homes indefinitely, only leaving to perform activities that the governor or state health officials have deemed essential and safe at that moment," he wrote.
Street also argued, "Indoor fitness operations have resumed in 49 states." Many other states have been quicker to reopen indoor fitness facilities than California.
On a conference call, several gym owner plaintiffs said they have had to lay off employees and are in danger of going out of business. Some also portrayed gym opening as a public health issue, especially as wildfire smoke has cloaked the state and made outdoor exercise impossible for many.
Malcolm Maclachlan
malcolm_maclachlan@dailyjournal.com
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com