Ritesh Tandon v. Gavin Newsom


FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 30 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RITESH TANDON; KAREN BUSCH; No. 21-15228 TERRY GANNON; CAROLYN GANNON; JEREMY WONG; JULIE EVARKIOU; D.C. No. 5:20-cv-07108-LHK DHRUV KHANNA; CONNIE RICHARDS; Northern District of California, FRANCES BEAUDET; MAYA San Jose MANSOUR, ORDER Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GAVIN NEWSOM; XAVIER BECERRA; SANDRA SHEWRY; ERICA PAN; JEFFREY V. SMITH; SARA H. CODY, Defendants-Appellees. Before: M. SMITH, BADE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges. Order by Judges M. SMITH and BADE, Partial Dissent and Partial Concurrence by Judge BUMATAY This appeal challenges the district court’s February 5, 2021 order denying Appellants’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Appellants now move for an emergency injunction pending appeal, seeking to prohibit the enforcement of California’s restrictions on private “gatherings” and various limitations on businesses as applied to Appellants’ in-home Bible studies, political activities, and business operations. We conclude that the Appellants have not satisfied the requirements for the extraordinary remedy of an injunction pending appeal. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008) (“[I]njunctive relief [is] an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief.”). Therefore, we deny the emergency motion. I. A. In the district court, Appellants challenged the State’s and Santa Clara County’s restrictions on private “gatherings.” However, in this motion, Appellants limit their challenges to the State’s restrictions.1 These restrictions “appl[y] to private gatherings, and all other gatherings not covered by existing sector guidance are prohibited.” Cal. Dep’t of Pub. Health, Guidance for the Prevention of COVID- 19 Transmission for Gatherings, https://cdph.ca.gov/programs/cid/dcdc/pages/covid-19/guidance-for-the- prevention-of-covid-19-transmission-for-gatherings-november-2020.aspx (last visited Mar. 30, 2021). “Gatherings are defined as social situations that bring 1 The State restrictions assign counties to different tiers based on factors such as adjusted COVID-19 case rates, positivity rates, a health equity metric, and vaccination rates. See Cal. Dep’t of Pub. Health, Blueprint for a Safer Economy, https://covid19.ca.gov/safer-economy/#tier-assignments (last visited Mar. 30, 2021). These tiers are assigned number and color designations in descending order of risk: Widespread (Tier 1 or purple); Substantial (Tier 2 or red); Moderate (Tier 3 or orange); and Minimal (Tier 4 or yellow). See id. Appellants reside in Santa Clara County, which is currently a Tier 2 county. 2 together people from different households at the same time in a single space or place.” Id. Under these restrictions, indoor and outdoor gatherings are limited to three households, but indoor gatherings are prohibited in Tier 1 and “strongly discouraged” in the remaining tiers. Id. The gatherings restrictions also limit gatherings in public parks or other outdoor spaces to three households. Id. A gathering must be in a space that is “large enough” to allow physical distancing of six feet, should be two hours or less in duration, and attendees must wear face coverings. Id. Finally, singing, chanting, shouting, cheering, and similar activities are allowed at outdoor gatherings with restrictions, but singing and chanting are not allowed at indoor …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals