 They asked me, are you knowingly going against Gavin Newsom's orders? And I said, yes. On December 3rd, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom ordered all California restaurants to stop serving customers in person and convert their businesses to takeout only. Stem, the tide, bend the curve. This is not a permanent state. It was the third shutdown order of the pandemic. Annie Ramel, who owns the Oak and Elixir restaurant in the San Diego beach town of Carlsbad, decided that she had had enough. These restaurants are staying open in the form of a peaceful protest. Keeping their doors open to try and financially survive. When the same person that's telling you and restricting you from being open is going to a restaurant himself and eating inside, it puts a little fire in you. This isn't right. I'm going to stand up for my rights. I'm going to stand up for my business that I worked extremely hard to to run and to have. And I'm going to stand up for the community. I deeply empathize and I have deep appreciation for the stress and the struggles our restaurants have had. I remember watching his press conference and he said it was going to be three weeks. I told restaurant owners, you're not smart. If you think this is only going to be three weeks. It's definitely going to be months. And I was right. Several decided that they would also defy the governor's order. They formed a coalition of restaurants and retail businesses that eventually numbered in the hundreds. We opened up and it was crazy because we were really the only city that was doing this outspokenly. The village in Carlsbad looked like this Friday evening. Outdoor patios bustling with customers looking to keep their favorite local spots alive during this pandemic. And restaurants like Oak and Elixir happily serving them despite the latest regional stay at home order. We were going to continue to be safe. We're going to continue to wear masks and sanitize and six feet apart and do everything that we had been doing before but that we were not going to close down. That we were going to continue to allow people to come to our restaurant and sit on at our tables and eat. Ramel was issued a citation by San Diego's public health department and by the state alcohol board, which threatened to revoke her liquor license. But the county sheriff had decided not to enforce the governor's order. One of the first nights we reopened against Gavin Newsom's orders. The sheriff started walking by and I remember my heart pounding because I'd heard these rumors that they were arresting people and taking them away. And I knew that if it would come down to that, that for me it was worth it. The police department actually came by and they did give us a piece of paper that was documenting that I was going against the orders. They said, we just want you to know that we don't want to be doing this. We we want you guys to survive this. We're sorry as they're handing me the paper. Today, the coalition that defied the governor's orders is suing Newsom and their state and local health departments to drop the fines and compensate for the losses incurred by the shutdowns. The defendants in the case declined the comment for this story. If they prevail, it could have implications for what the scope of executive power truly is in a state of emergency. Underground regulations facilitate arbitrary enforcement and they undermine the rule of law. Attorney Matt Harrison represents the San Diego County business owners. He was also a former senior fellow at the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes Reason TV. Harrison says Newsom's emergency orders didn't follow the proper procedure for issuing new regulations. One of the most canonical established applications of due process is that the law needs to be clear, clear enough so that a person, a reasonable person can understand what's prohibited and what's allowed. We look to a blueprint for safely reopening the economy. Harrison says this plan wasn't legally binding because the governor didn't follow the correct legal procedure. Regulations in California are required to be submitted to the Secretary of State, who then makes them available for a public review process. Regulations also have to be accompanied by an explanation for why they're justified. It's the rules for the rule makers, so the regulations for the regulators. The state argues that the governor was able to prevent the procedure because he was issuing emergency orders during a public health crisis. And whether it stands is whether due process exists in emergencies in the state. Rammel says that despite the governor's mantra, the regulations didn't follow the science with regard to COVID spread. There was no proof that the outbreaks were coming from us. We felt like we were keeping people safe for months. Rammel and the coalition lost the first round when a San Diego Superior Court judge dismissed the coalition's lawsuit. The case is now before an appeals court. Courts have recently demonstrated a willingness to strike down administrative actions that circumvent standard rulemaking procedures. Several Trump administration actions were struck down, including one that would have added a census question about citizenship status, one that would have changed deportation procedures and an executive order that would have allowed employers to opt out of certain birth control insurance coverage. Rammel says the fines she still faces for refusing to follow the governor's order amount to a couple thousand dollars and don't threaten her livelihood. But this isn't a fight about money. Our rights are being tested. And that's scary because we live in America where we're supposed to be free and we're supposed to be able to have our rights and make the choice to be open. And I think that's being threatened right now.