More than 30 lawsuits have been filed against California Gov. Gavin Newsom since March over various COVID-19 executive orders he’s issued.
Among them are several active cases related to businesses that were forced to close, grievances by landlords, and plaintiffs claiming the executive orders violate federal and state laws. Active lawsuits filed by small business owners of fitness centers, salon owners and nonprofit organizations are ongoing and have not yet been ruled on in their respective courts.
In Antoon v. Newsom, filed May 27 by Thomas Antoon of Pacifica Beach Yoga, the plaintiff alleges that the state shutting his business has caused him not to be able to buy medication and has caused “signs of mental health deterioration.” He alleges the governor’s order has deprived him and others of their right to assemble, to own private property, to due process, and from unreasonable search and seizure, and cruel and unusual punishment perpetrated by state and local officials.
In Ibarra v. Newsom, filed May 12 by two hair salon owners, a barbering and cosmetology school, and an industry group, plaintiffs allege that by not designating their services as essential, the state and local officials have violated their rights to due process and equal protection under the law and the right to own private property.
Another lawsuit (Best Supplement Guide v. Newsom) filed May 12 by a small chain of gyms in Sacramento and Lodi against the governor and state and local officials alleges that state and local orders violate their rights to free speech, to assemble, to own private property, to due process and equal protection under the law, and violate basic contract law.
In Tresner v. Newsom, filed May 18 by the owner of a Rio Linda gym north of Sacramento, the governor, state and county health officials were sued for damages inflicted on his business. The plaintiff alleges that the “strong-arm and forced closure” of Rio Linda Fitness has cost him $100,000.
Culinary Studios Inc v. Newsom was filed September 17 by 10 restaurants and bars in Fresno County. They sued Newsom and other officials arguing the orders are “completely arbitrary, random and ridiculous” and violate their right to equal protection under the law. They estimate their financial losses total $200 million as a result of Newsom’s and others’ orders.
Other lawsuits relate to landlord grievances, such as Michie v. Newsom and Bols v. Newsom, both filed on May 8.
In Bols v. Newsom, San Diego landlord JD Bols, whose tenants include hair salons and churches, sued the governor and other officials over the shelter-in-place orders. He argues the orders violate due process and equal protection under the law and the right to own private property.
Individuals and groups who argue the orders violate state and federal law include Samuel Armstrong of Los Angeles County, who sued Newsom April 23, claiming the statewide shelter in place order violates the 14th Amendment.
Another lawsuit is Six v. Newsom, in which six California residents claim Newsom’s shelter-in-place order violates their right to due process and equal protection under the law. Their complaint cites a memo from the U.s Department of Justice warning state and local officials about “overbearing infringement of constitutional and statutory protections.”
Several other lawsuits have been filed or amended since March addressing religious liberty and education policies.
