Michigan restaurants lose federal lawsuit to overturn ban on indoor dining

US District Judge Paul Maloney issued a written ruling denying the MRLA's request for an injunction in its case filed against the state, the Detroit Free Press reported.

The trade organization sued after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and the state's health department issued an executive order that began Nov. 18, just days before Thanksgiving. This devastating blow to Michigan's restaurant industry puts a "three-week pause" on indoor dining is effective through Dec. 8.

At a Kalamazoo hearing on Monday held via Zoom, Judge Maloney heard the two opposing sides in the lawsuit challenging Michigan's directive.

An attorney for the MRLA explained that the restaurant market is on the verge of collapse and cannot survive another extended shutdown. The state attorney general's office argued that Michigan's hospital system is overloaded because of abundant coronavirus cases due to record levels this fall.

Judge Maloney asked both legal teams to submit additional information, including COVID-19 hospitality capacity numbers and testing data. Details of a summary judgment filed in an ongoing suit questioning the statewide mask mandate were also requested.

Assistant State Attorney General Neil Giovanatti argued that restaurants ranked higher than other sites for COVID-19 infections because patrons have to eat maskless. The state's court documents cite research that found that dining services ranked "four times riskier than gyms and coffee shops, followed by hotels."

However, the MRLA cited Michigan Department of Health and Human Services' data that only 4.3 percent of all COVID-19 outbreaks can be attributed to restaurants. They also referenced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's latest guidance, updated mid-November, on how restaurants can re-open and operate safely.

MRLA attorney Kelli Mulder noted that 2,000 restaurants have permanently closed in the state already and 250,000 jobs have been lost. The MRLA estimated that 6,000 more restaurants will be closed permanently by spring without additional federal stimulus funds.

Mulder asserted that the ban violates the restaurants constitutional rights to equal protection under the law. "Constitutional liberties needs to be vigilantly protected," Mulder told Maloney.

Monday's hearing came amid a letter sent out by the owners of the Andiamo restaurant chain, urging fellow Michigan restaurateurs to unite and open their doors in defiance if the order is extended. That message states that the order is expected to be prolonged until at least through the end of the year if the MRLA loses the lawsuit.

"Our industry cannot survive another extended closure," the letter read. "Thousands of restaurants and tens of thousands of our employees can not survive it either. We need to band together and FIGHT BACK but we need to do this as a United Group of Michigan Restaurant Owners."

The Vicari Restaurant Group, which operates Andiamo restaurants and umbrellas 25 establishments, has since declared that the intention was simply to "brainstorm ideas of what could possibly be done to keep our restaurants open." If the lawsuit is unsuccessful, Vicari is inviting restaurant owners and vendors to a Dec. 3 informational meeting.

Earlier this month, Judge Maloney denied a request for an emergency injunction to halt the state from restricting restaurants and bars to outside dining, carryout, and delivery. The lawsuit claimed restaurants were unfairly singled out, while malls were allowed to remain open.

"Plaintiffs have shown themselves highly capable of following the comprehensive protocols that have been in place for several months, and there is no reason in-person dining should be entirely prohibited now, especially while the November 15 Order permits other businesses to have clientele indoors and on premises," the lawsuit stated. "For example, under the November 15 Order, it is legal to get a tattoo or haircut but not to eat a meal indoors at a restaurant."