US Appeals Court Opens Door to Strip Clubs Receiving Federal Coronavirus Relief
The Seventh Circuit's order Wednesday marked the second time in days that a federal appeals panel had ruled against the U.S. Small Business Administration in disputes over whether adult clubs can seek COVID-19 loan relief.
May 20, 2020 at 06:09 PM
5 minute read
A federal appeals court on Wednesday cleared a path for adult nightclubs to seek government-backed coronavirus relief loans, dealing a setback to the Trump administration in its bid to block those businesses from receiving assistance.
The U.S. Justice Department had asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to block a trial judge's decision requiring the U.S. Small Business Administration to deem adult nightclubs eligible for coronavirus relief loans. After agreeing to stay the lower court's decision earlier this month, a three-judge panel on Wednesday denied the Justice Department's request to stave off the ruling.
The panel—including Judges Michael Kanne, Ilana Rovner and David Hamilton—did not elaborate on their reasoning to deny the government's request to stay the underlying preliminary injunction.
A group of Wisconsin strip clubs challenged Small Business Administration regulations that excluded them from a federal loan program designed to prop up small businesses struggling amid the coronavirus outbreak. The clubs argued that their exclusion from the Payroll Protection Program, created as part of the roughly $2 trillion coronavirus relief package, amounted to a violation of their free-speech rights under the First Amendment.
The suit from the strip clubs was part of a wave of litigation in courts across the country seeking access to federal coronavirus relief loans. In another lawsuit, a group representing political consultants and lobbyists challenged the exclusion of the influence industry from the loan program. In that case, a federal judge in Washington declined to order the Trump administration to make coronavirus relief loans available to lobbyists. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Tuesday the court would rule on the court papers and not hold oral arguments.
The Seventh Circuit's order Wednesday was the second in less than a week in which a federal appeals court ruled against the Small Business Administration in a dispute over federal coronavirus loans. A Sixth Circuit panel on Friday, ruling in a Michigan case in which strip clubs sued the agency, refused to pause a trial judge's order favoring the businesses.
The Seventh Circuit's ruling came weeks after a federal judge in Milwaukee ordered the Trump administration to allow the businesses to tap into the government-backed coronavirus loans. U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, in a 33-page opinion, said the nightclubs had "shown that their inability to obtain a loan through the PPP will prevent them from exercising their First Amendment right to present erotic dance entertainment."
Within days, the Justice Department called on the appeals court to prevent Adelman's ruling from taking effect. The Justice Department defended the exclusion of adult nightclubs from the loan program, saying that restriction on the loans funds represented not a restriction on their free-speech rights but rather a refusal to fund it with public dollars.
"That decision was rational, and reflects the policy judgment of Congress and the SBA that limited public funds are best spent subsidizing other types of businesses at this time," Justice Department lawyers said.
Justice Department lawyers argued that "absent a stay, the government will be forced to obligate limited taxpayer funds to underwrite loans to businesses that Congress and the SBA have determined are not entitled to such funds, to the detriment of otherwise eligible borrowers who would receive the funds but for the district court's erroneous injunction."
In a brief earlier this month, the Justice Department said that the businesses "remain free to conduct their First Amendment activities as they see fit using any other funds."
Jeff Olson, a Madison-based lawyer representing the adult nightclubs, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the appeals court's ruling. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment Wednesday.
The Justice Department could ask the full Seventh Circuit to take up the panel's order or head to the U.S. Supreme Court and ask the justices to take up the case. The court has not had an opportunity to review disputes over federal coronavirus relief loans.
Adelman, the Wisconsin judge, made waves earlier this year for a piece of writing in which he criticized rulings under the leadership of Chief Judge John Roberts Jr. Adelman described a court that he said was benefitting more powerful interests over democratic values.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250