U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Gym 24/7 Fitness Case

News Summary

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case of The Gym 24/7 Fitness in Alma, Michigan, effectively ending its legal battle for compensation lost during COVID-19 lockdowns. The gym had claimed that the state’s closure orders amounted to an unconstitutional taking of property rights. The lower courts had sided with the state, emphasizing the necessity of the shutdown for public health. This decision reflects a trend of rejecting similar business lawsuits related to pandemic restrictions.

Alma, Michigan – U.S. Supreme Court Declines The Gym 24/7 Fitness Case

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case of The Gym 24/7 Fitness in Alma, Michigan, regarding compensation for financial losses incurred due to COVID-19 lockdowns. This decision was issued on June 2, 2023, effectively ending the gym’s legal battle against the state over the COVID-19 related closure mandates.

In 2020, The Gym 24/7 Fitness sued the state, claiming that Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home orders during the early months of the pandemic caused “economic devastation” and represented an “unconstitutional taking” of their property rights. The gym was forced to close in March 2020 as part of the state’s public health efforts to control the spread of COVID-19, remaining shuttered for six months.

The gym owners, Randy Clark and Yvette Franco-Clark, did not contest the governor’s authority to issue the closure orders. Instead, they sought financial compensation from the state for their business losses resulting from the government’s reaction to the pandemic.

Initial Court Proceedings

Initially, the state Court of Claims denied a request to dismiss The Gym’s lawsuit, on the grounds that the state failed to demonstrate the necessity of closing the gyms. However, this decision was later overturned by the state Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of the state. The appeals court concluded that The Gym 24/7 Fitness was not deprived of all economically productive use of its property during the closure, categorizing the matter as involving regulatory taking rather than a physical seizure of property.

Although the gym attempted to reopen during the summer of 2020, it faced another shutdown when local authorities intervened due to violations of the governor’s executive orders.

State’s Defense Efforts

The Michigan Attorney General’s Office defended the state’s actions, emphasizing the necessity of the stay-at-home orders to protect public health amid the pandemic’s extremely high mortality rates. Over 40,000 Michiganders died from COVID-19 from 2020 to 2022, underscoring the gravity of the health situation during that period.

Legal Rationale and Future Implications

The gym owners’ legal team argued that the lower courts did not fully account for the economic hardships imposed on their business and highlighted that compensation frameworks for state actions were vague. In the end, the Supreme Court denied the case without any accompanying commentary, leaving the appellate court’s ruling in place.

The decision aligns with a broader trend, as similar lawsuits from other businesses related to COVID-19 closures have been consistently rejected in various federal and state courts. Currently, additional lawsuits from businesses, including a roller skating rink and a restaurant association, are still pending in the state Court of Appeals.

Context on Executive Orders

Notably, The Gym 24/7 Fitness’s initial lawsuit preceded a critical ruling from the Michigan Supreme Court in October 2020, which overturned Governor Whitmer’s authority to enact such executive orders under the Emergency Management Act. This context adds to the complexity of the ongoing legal disputes surrounding COVID-19-related business closures.

As the legal landscape around COVID-19 restrictions continues to evolve, businesses impacted by similar closures are looking toward the outcomes of these pending cases for guidance. The Supreme Court’s refusal to consider The Gym’s case stands as a pivotal moment in understanding how the government’s public safety measures during a crisis can intersect with individual property rights and business interests.

Deeper Dive: News & Info About This Topic

• Detroit Free Press: U.S. Supreme Court Declines The Gym 24/7 Fitness Case
• KFOR: Former Students of Geary High School Saddened Seeing Alma Mater on Fire
• The Morning Sun: State Court of Appeals Rules Against Alma Gym
• Detroit Catholic: Justice Barrett Urges Catholic School Students to Work Hard and Dream
• Wikipedia: COVID-19 Pandemic
• Google Search: COVID-19 Legal Cases