Bars argue before judge to reopen
Orlando bar owners asked a judge on Tuesday to let them reopen, arguing the state’s ban brought by the coronavirus pandemic singles out bars without evidence the establishments play a more significant role in spreading the virus than other businesses.
John Dill, a Winter Park attorney representing the owner of Chillers, Latitudes, Ember and other bars, said Florida’s order than prohibits bars from serving alcohol on site when they don’t also serve food is unconstitutional and unnecessary to contain the pandemic.
“We’re saying my client’s fundamental rights have been violated,” Dill said, later adding, “What my clients would like is the opportunity to comply with the social distancing laws.”
Florida prohibited bars from selling drinks — effectively shuttering them — for the second time in late June as virus cases spiked across the state. Bars were first ordered to close in midMarch and were allowed to reopen during the first week of June, but that only lasted a few weeks before a post-Memorial Day surge of infections, including some linked to bars, prompted the state to take action again.
Circuit Court Judge Kevin Weiss did not immediately make a ruling on an injunction sought by the bar owners.
A judge in Broward County on Tuesday upheld the state’s ban after a similar hearing on behalf of bar owners in South Florida.
The Orlando challenge, filed by the owners last month, also argued that serving food doesn’t have an effect on the spread of COVID-19. Dill contended it’s inconsistent state policy for Florida officials to blame bars for the summer spike because of young people gathering there, while officials also advocated for schools to reopen.
“So if the issue is the congregation of young people as the source for the spread of COVID-19, why is it that the schools are open?” Dill said.
Attorneys for Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation said the hearing was moot because the state order has been amended, nullifying a specific piece challenged by the bar owners.
Previously, the ban targeted businesses that make more than half of their revenue from alcohol sales, which the bar owners called “arbitrary.” Now the order prohibits on-site alcohol consumption at businesses licensed to sell alcohol, but not food.
In the executive order, DBPR Secretary Halsey Beshears wrote that because so many bars weren’t following guidelines, enforcement became “impractical and insufficient.”
Ray Treadwell, an attorney for DBPR, said the state was sympathetic toward the financial struggles of bar owners, but that wasn’t the legal standard needed to issue an injunction. He also said that while no end date is listed in the order, “we all understand this state of emergency will end eventually.”
“Today plaintiffs presented zero evidence to support the violation of a fundamental right,” he said.
Dirk Farrow, President of Church Street Entertainment, said if the judge doesn’t rule in their favor — or if the order isn’t rescinded — he may have to close permanently many of his bars, which have already lost about $4.1 million in sales.
The company runs two restaurants that are open with employees wearing masks and gloves and subject to temperature checks before clocking in.
“We think that’s good government,” he said. “We would love to match what the restaurants are doing at our bars, and if we didn’t do it, we’d have to pay the consequences.”