{"id":"DUT-CT-007","kind":"duty","level":"court","jurisdiction":"Connecticut (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut)","state":"CT","metro":"","industry":"","agency":"","eco":"","issuer":"United States District Court, D. Conn. (Shea, J.)","authority":"28 U.S.C. § 1331; 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905); Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 28-9, 28-8a","instrument":"Amato v. Elicker, No. 3:20-cv-464 (MPS), ECF No. 32, Ruling on Plaintiffs\u0027 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (D. Conn. May 19, 2020), reported at 460 F. Supp. 3d 202","title":"Amato v. Elicker: ruling denying a New Haven restaurant\u0027s motion to enjoin Executive Orders 7, 7D, 7G and 7N","dateIssued":"2020-05-19","effective":"2020-05-19","end":"final ruling on the motion (motion denied)","startDate":"2020-05-19","endDate":"2021-09-30","quarters":["2020Q2","2020Q3","2020Q4","2021Q1","2021Q2","2021Q3"],"types":["GATH","CLOSE","OTHER"],"addressees":["specified businesses (restaurants and bars; the 50\u0027s Lounge, New Haven) and, by its reasoning, every business addressed by EOs 7, 7D, 7G and 7N"],"clause":"under the Jacobson standard, I conclude that Executive Order 7N is within the state\u0027s power to protect public health during an epidemic and is not a \u0022plain, palpable\u0022 invasion of the Plaintiffs\u0027 right to freedom of assembly.","enforcement":"None imposed by the ruling; the ruling left the orders and their enforcement in place (footnote 4 quotes § 28-9(a)-(b) and § 28-8a(a))","functions":[],"notes":"Confirmed that a Connecticut restaurant had no right to operate free of the Governor\u0027s gathering and off-premises-only orders: the orders were valid exercises of the State\u0027s power under § 28-9, had a \u0027real and substantial relation\u0027 to curbing the virus, and the business was bound to comply. Character as recorded: adjudication (orders upheld).","sourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ctd-3_20-cv-00464/pdf/USCOURTS-ctd-3_20-cv-00464-0.pdf","snapshot":"","fileExists":true,"fileBytes":371757,"grade":"primary","character":"adjudication","description":"","collection":"DUT-CT","url":"/library/DUT-CT-007","exhibitUrl":"/exhibit/DUT-CT-007","citation":"United States District Court, D. Conn. (Shea, J.), Amato v. Elicker, No. 3:20-cv-464 (MPS), ECF No. 32, Ruling on Plaintiffs\u0027 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (D. Conn. May 19, 2020), reported at 460 F. Supp. 3d 202 (Ex. DUT-CT-007)","stateName":"Connecticut","related":["DUT-CT-013"]}