Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
7/14/2020 11:55 AM
Melisa Miller, District Clerk
Montgomery County, Texas
Deputy Clerk, Julia Meyer
COME NOW, Plaintiffs MARK BEATTY and BACKWOODS LLC, file this Original
Petition, Application for Injunctive Relief, and Request for Disclosure. Defendants are the
his Official Capacity), (“Defendants”). Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that paragraphs “6”
and “7” of Governor Abbott’s (“Governor”) Executive Order GA-28 (“GA-28”) violates the Texas
Constitution and enjoin Defendants from enforcing GA-28. See Exhibit A, GA-28
1
I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
1. This action should be conducted under discovery control plan Level 3 pursuant to Rule
III. PARTIES
7. Jurisdiction. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiffs seek to vindicate
their rights under the Texas Constitution via the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act. TEX. CIV.
PRAC. & REM. CODE § 37.003. Plaintiffs seek a declaration that GA-28 is unconstitutional on
its face and as applied to businesses and owners that maintain an alcohol license the State of Texas
and have had historical gross receipts of alcohol in excess of 51% of the total sales for the business.
15.011, and 65.023 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
V. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2
9. In Texas, businesses can apply for a license to sell alcohol at their business.
10. Texas differentiates between licensees that have more than 51% of their revenue from
alcohol sales (“51% license”) and licensees that have less than 51% of alcohol sales (“Less than
51% license”). Businesses with alcohol licenses, that sell alcohol for consumption on their
premises, and 51% or more of their sales are from alcohol, are required by the Texas Alcoholic
Beverage Commission to post a 51% sign (the “51% license”). The Red Sign, among other things,
prohibits patrons from entering the premises with a firearm under all circumstances. In contrast, a
business which has a alcohol permit but generates less than 50% of its revenue from the sale of
alcoholic beverages is required to post a sign providing “The unlicensed possession of a weapon
on these premises is a felony with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to
11. This is not necessarily an indicator of the nature of the business, as some restaurants
maintain a license and are classified as greater than 51%, and operate like a restaurant. On the
other hand, some businesses maintain a license and are classified as under 51% percent category
and they operate a full service “bar” in a § of their restaurant. GA-28 creates two classes of
12. Texas Alcohol licenses are created by Statute, within the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code,
and the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (the “TABC”) is tasked with implementing those
13. The statutes do not have a provision that allows the TABC to suspend the statutes that
create alcohol licenses in Texas. TABC is only tasked with the regulation of the licensees.
3
14. Further, the Governor of Texas does not have the power to suspend statutes creating those
licenses, as Article 1, § 28 of the Texas Constitution states, “No power of suspending laws in this
15. During the duration of the pandemic, Governor Abbott has issued many Executive Orders
that impact businesses that maintain an alcohol license of some sort. These Executive Orders
16. Texas Government Code § 418.012, states that Governor Abbotts, “Executive orders,
17. After closing down all restaurants and bars in the state, on April 27, 2020, Governor Greg
Abbott issued Executive Order GA 18 relating to the expanded reopening of services as part of the
safe strategic plan to open Texas in response to the that order provided that as of 12:01 AM on
Friday May 1, 2020 certain “Reopened Services” would be allowed to operate even if they were
18. Those Reopened Services include “dine-in restaurants for restaurants that operate at up to
25% of the total listed occupancy of the restaurant” but only “Restaurants that had less than 51%
of their gross receipts from the sale of alcoholic beverages and are therefore not required to post
the 51% sign required by Texas law as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission.”
In other words, any business with a majority of their revenue generated from the sale of alcohol
19. GA-18 also used similar language, “People shall avoid visiting bars…”
4
20. On June 3, 2020, Governor Abbott issued Executive Order GA-26 which provided
restricted opening of businesses that serve food and alcohol, again based on the type of alcohol
license granted to a business. However, in addition to the already opened businesses with a less
than 51% license, this time the Governor allowed businesses with a 51% license to open at 50%
capacity, provided that only customers who are seated shall be served. Additionally, Defendant’s
order required that groups be no larger than 10 and that the distance between groups must be 6 feet
or more. In effect, these rules allowed all alcohol licensees to operate their business in what would
be commonly understood as how a restaurant would operate with different seating tables or areas
for each party within the establishment. See Exhibit C, Executive Order GA-26.
21. Texas businesses with alcohol licenses ordered supplies, hired staff, and resumed
22. On June 26, 2020, at 8:45 AM, Governor Abbott issued EO GA-28, which closed any
business with a 51% license, regardless of the nature of the business or the services being provided
at the business, and with less than four-hours notice. The Order states:
23. EO GA-28 did not close “bar” type settings, but did close down any person with a 51%
License, regardless of the nature of their business. Per the overly broad language of the order, if
5
the business maintains a 51% license, no person can come on the business’s property, even if the
business ceases selling alcohol and modifies their business operation to provide non-alcohol based
products and services. For example, the business cannot sell masks, cannot rent the space out as
a meeting space, cannot sell cigars and cannot provide food services. There is complete prohibition
24. The Texas Attorney General has interpreted the language: “People shall not visit bars…”
to mean that the order closes bars and similar establishments. See Exhibit D, Advisory Opinion
Plaintiffs’ Business
25. Plaintiff MARK BEATTY is the owner of Plaintiff BACKWOODS SALOON LLC.
Plaintiffs’ business maintains a 51% license and GA-28 prohibits any person from going to the
premises of Plaintiffs’ business. Plaintiff BEATTY is barred from gathering on his private
property with his friends or customers, for any purpose. Plaintiffs have lost significant amounts
26. Governor Abbott issued Executive Order GA-28 on June 26th, 2020, which included an
enforcement mechanism, pursuant to Texas Government Code 418.173, making any violation of
carried a fine and a criminal punishment range of up to $1000 and up to 180 days in jail.
27. Defendants listed in this lawsuit are tasked with law enforcement in Montgomery County
and are therefore responsible for the enforcement of GA-28 in the county that Plaintiffs are located
in.
6
28. Enforcement of the Governor’s Executive Orders by law enforcement has been
unpredictable and dependent upon the jurisdiction and the involvement of TABC. While some
jurisdictions have refused to criminally enforce the provisions of this order, some law enforcement
have shown up on the premises of the business and shut them down. Furthermore, Texas Alcoholic
Beverage Commission has sent licensed peace officers, with a firearm and badge prominently
worn, into businesses that maintain a 51% license and are ordering them to shut down under the
29. In addition to the threat of criminal penalty, the businesses are subjected to loss of business
revenue by the presence of armed law enforcement in their parking lots and in plain view of
customers, if law enforcement attempts to enforce. The mere response of law enforcement to
investigate a violation of GA-28 would cause damage to the businesses. It is generally inferred
that police investigate crimes, and the presence of armed, and badged law enforcement on the
business premises likely gives the impression that crimes are occurring on a business premise.
This is can have a long-term negative impact on the business, and deter people from coming to the
business.
30. Given the threat of prosecution described above, and the further damage of having a police
presence on the property, Plaintiffs have been forced to close their businesses. This has resulted
31. In connection with the conduct described above, Defendants’ enforcement of GA-28 is a
32. The Texas Supreme Court weighed in on the overwhelming importance of holding our
elected officials to the standards that the Texas State Constitution demands, as follows: With great
7
sagacity, the Supreme Court, in In re Salon A La Mode, et al, No. 20-0340, 2020 2020 WL 2125844
(Tex. May 5, 2020), set forth the exacting standards to be applied, especially in times of a
pandemic, as follows:
The Constitution is not suspended when the government declares a state of disaster." In re
Abbott. No. 20-0291. --- S.W.3d ----,----, 2020 WL 1943226, at *1 (Tex. Apr. 23, 2020).
All government power in this country, no matter how well-intentioned, derives only from
the state and federal constitutions. Government power cannot be exercised in conflict with
these constitutions, even in a pandemic. In the weeks since American governments began
taking emergency measures in response to the coronavirus, the sovereign people of this
country have graciously and peacefully endured a suspension of their civil liberties without
precedent in our nation's history. In some parts of the country, churches have been closed
by government decree, although Texas is a welcome exception. Nearly everywhere, the
First Amendment "right of the people to peaceably assemble" has been suspended
altogether. U.S. Const. amend. I. In many places, people are forbidden to leave their homes
without a government approved reason. Tens of millions can no longer earn a living
because the government has declared their employers or their businesses "'non essential.'
Those who object to these restrictions should remember they were imposed by duly elected
officials, vested by statute with broad emergency powers, who must make difficult
decisions under difficult circumstances. At the same time, all of us-the judiciary, the other
branches of government, and our fellow citizens-must insist that every action our
governments take complies with the Constitution, especially now. If we tolerate
unconstitutional government orders during an emergency, whether out of expediency or
fear, we abandon the Constitution at the moment we need it most.
Any government that has made the grave decision to suspend the liberties of a free people
during a health emergency should welcome the opportunity to demonstrate-both to its
citizens and to the courts-that its chosen measures are absolutely necessary to combat a
threat of overwhelming severity. The government should also be expected to demonstrate
that less restrictive measures cannot adequately address the threat. Whether it is strict
scrutiny or some other rigorous form of review, courts must identify and apply a legal
standard by which to judge the constitutional validity of the government's anti-virus
actions. When the present crisis began, perhaps not enough was known about the virus to
second-guess the worst-case projections motivating the lockdowns. As more becomes
known about the threat and about the less restrictive, more targeted ways to respond to it,
continued burdens on constitutional liberties may not survive judicial scrutiny.
Ideally, these debates would play out in the public square, not in courtrooms. No court
should relish being asked to question the judgment of government officials who were
elected to make difficult decisions in times such as these. However, when constitutional
rights are at stake, courts cannot automatically defer to the judgments of other branches of
government. When properly called upon, the judicial branch must not shrink from its duty
to require the government's anti-virus orders to comply with the Constitution and the law,
no matter the circumstances.
8
In re Salon A La Mode, et al, No. 20-0340, 2020 2020 WL 2125844 (Tex. May 5, 2020)
33. While GA-28 will most assuredly fail any strict scrutiny test when fundamental rights
are implicated (i.e. freedom of assembly), it is important to note that there is also no rational
basis for the disparity of treatment and there is no legitimate governmental purpose for closure
preclude any business of any nature, from operating if that business entity so happens to have
34. Further, there is no rational basis for the disparity of treatment and no rational basis for
an order to close any business that holds a 51% license, while also authorizing cosmetologists,
massage establishments, barbershops, nail salons, tanning salons, tattoo studios, piercing studios,
and other close contact businesses to operate with no occupancy restrictions. All of the business
listed with no occupancy restrictions involve prolonged direct contact between people, including
contact with blood, skin, eyes, and breathing, coughing and sneezing while in close proximity.
36. GA-28, paragraphs 6 and 7, prohibit all persons from being on the premises of businesses
that maintain a 51% license. Past executive Orders under the authority of Texas Government Code
§ 418 have had similar language relating to percent sales, and Plaintiff anticipates that even if GA-
28 is withdrawn, any future orders under Texas Government Code will be subject to this cause of
action.
9
37. Pursuant to Texas’ Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, Plaintiffs ask this Court to declare
that GA-28 is in violation of Plaintiffs’ due course of law protections for the infringement on the
38. Article 1, § 27 of the Texas Constitution protects Texans’ fundamental right to “assemble
together for their common good.” This right “is not limited to seeking governmental redress of
grievances, and may not be unduly curtailed” by laws or ordinances. Faulk v. State, 608 S.W.2d
625, 633 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (Clinton, J., dissenting) (warning that overbroad ordinances can
have a “chilling effect” on the freedom of assembly). The Texas freedom of assembly clause
affords broader protections than the federal right to freedom of Assembly, because the Texas
right to freedom of assembly is fundamental and any law restricting it is subject to a strict
scrutiny analysis. Zaatari v. City of Austin, No. 03-17-00812-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS
39. GA-28 limits assembly on private property without regard to the peacefulness of or
reasons for the assembly. And because the infringement of the fundamental right to assemble is
not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest, it violates the Texas
Constitution's guarantee to due course of law. Zaatari, No. 03-17-00812-CV, 2019 Tex. App.
40. GA-28 prohibits people from assembling on private property, which implicates both
property and privacy rights. “The right to assemble is just as strong, if not stronger, when it is
exercised on private property with the permission of the owner, thereby creating a nexus with
property and privacy rights.” Zaatari, No. 03-17-00812-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 10290, at
52.
10
41. Executive Orders, ordinances and statutes that restrict the freedom of assembly must
further a compelling state interest, and “be narrowly tailored to prevent reaching a substantial
amount of constitutionally protected conduct.” Sotto v. Wainwright, 601 F.2d 184, 191 (5th Cir.
1979) (“A state must advance a compelling justification to preserve a law or regulation that
breaches any fundamental right”); Olvera v. State, 806 S.W.2d 546, 549 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
(discussing anti-picketing statutes); Geissler v. Coussoulis, 424 S.W.2d 709, 712 (Tex. Civ.
App.—San Antonio 1967, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (“The right to assemble peaceably is ‘cognate to those
42. GA-28 bar on assembly is neither narrowly tailored, nor does it further a compelling state
interest. Even if it did however, such regulation would be unwarranted in light of less intrusive
means.
43. GA-28 is a facial violation of the freedom of assembly under the Texas Constitution. Tex.
44. Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court declare GA-28 a facial violation of the
46. Pursuant to Texas’ Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, Plaintiffs respectfully request that
this Court enter a judgment declaring GA-28 to be a violation of the substantive due course of law
47. Article I, § 19 of the Texas Constitution protects citizens from the deprivation of “life,
liberty, [or] property … except by the due course of the law of the land.”
11
48. GA-28 also violates Plaintiffs’ freedom of movement under the Texas Constitution’s
substantive due course of law clause and coerces all Plaintiffs to enforce such a violation against
49. The due course of law clause contained in Article 1, § 19, of the Texas Constitution
provides protection for rights central to the “scheme of ordered liberty,” including the right to leave
one’s house and move around as one pleases. Bykofsky v. Borough of Middletown, 97 S.Ct. 394,
395 (1976) (Marshal, J. dissenting); Casarez v. State, 913 S.W.2d 468, 487 n.18 (Tex. Crim. App.
1994), on reh’g (Dec. 13, 1995) (“Personal freedom ‘consists in the power of locomotion, of
changing situation, or removing one’s person to whatever place one’s own inclination may direct,
50. Under the Texas Constitution, freedom of movement is a fundamental right, and any
restrictions upon this freedom must be narrowly tailored in order to further a compelling state
interest. Bykofsky, 97 S.Ct. at 395 (Marshall, J. dissenting); see also Papachristou v. City of
Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 164 (1972) (“Persons ‘wandering or strolling’ from place to place have
been extolled by Walt Whitman and Vachel Lindsay. . . The difficulty is that these activities are
historically part of the amenities of life as we have known them. They are not mentioned in the
Constitution or in the Bill of Rights. These unwritten amenities have been in part responsible for
giving our people the feeling of independence and self-confidence, the feeling of creativity.”).
51. Plaintiffs have already demonstrated that GA-28 does not further a compelling state
interest. Even if it has, it is not narrowly tailored to serve this compelling interest because it
restricts more freedom than necessary to achieve their goal. Less intrusive means remain available
12
52. GA-28’s order that “people shall not visit” the entire premises of all business with a 51%
53. GA-28 is neither narrowly tailored, nor does it further a compelling state interest. Even if
it did however, such regulation would be unwarranted in light of less intrusive means.
54. GA-28 is a facial violation of the freedom of assembly under the Texas Constitution. Tex.
55. Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court declare GA-28 a facial violation of the
56. Article I, § 3 of the Texas Constitution provides: "All free men, when they form a social
compact, have equal rights, and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public
57. EO GA-28 determines which people, services, and groups are permitted to operate their
businesses, and who must shut down their business on three hours' notice. This violates the Equal
protection clause and creates a large disparity between businesses that operate similarly.
58. There is no rational basis for the disparity of treatment and there is no legitimate
59. As demonstrated above, the 51% license businesses present nothing uniquely different than
the less than 50% licensees in the nature, manner and extent of the business they conduct, or the
purported COVID risks they present, yet the 51% licensees are completely shut down, less than
13
60. Governor Abbott's singling out of the 51% license businesses for shut down is likewise
arbitrary and capricious when compared to EO GA-28's more favorable treatment of other, non-
bar related businesses; such as gyms, amusement parks, professional sports, nail salons, massage
parlors, and the like, all of which involve close, extended, crowded surroundings, some or all of
which would present COVID spreading risks at least as much as the 51% license businesses, and
61. Instead of shutting down the businesses other than the 51% license businesses, Governor
Abbott either let those businesses operate as normal, or, at most, imposed limited restrictions
as to occupancy and operations. In other words, Governor Abbott, with respect to those businesses,
62. Arbitrarily and capriciously, Governor Abbott chose not to impose the lesser, least
restrictive, measures on the 51% license businesses; Like the less than 50 percent businesses, 51%
license businesses can and should have the opportunity to operate with the least restrictive
measures in place.
established.” Iranian Muslim Org. v. City of San Antonio, 615 S.W.2d 202, 208 (Tex. 1981)
(granting injunction on first amendment grounds, and requiring city to issue parade permit); see
also Henry v. Greenville Airport Commn., 284 F.2d 631, 633 (4th Cir. 1960) (holding, in equal
protection context, that“[t]he District Court has no discretion to deny relief by preliminary
injunction to a person who clearly establishes by undisputed evidence that he is being denied a
constitutional right.”); S.W. Newspapers Corp. v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362, 368 (Tex. Civ. App.—
Amarillo 1979).
14
64. “The denial of a constitutionally guaranteed right . . .as a matter of law, inflicts an
irreparable injury.” S.W. Newspapers Corp. v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362, 368 (Tex. Civ. App.—
Amarillo 1979).
65. Plaintiffs’ Original Petition, above, demonstrates that enforcement of the GA-28 violates
the Texas Constitution, which guarantees Plaintiffs’ rights to freedom of movement, privacy,
66. Plaintiffs are facing imminent and irreparable harm from the Defendants’ future
enforcement of GA-28.
67. Plaintiffs have no other adequate legal to adequately compensate for the continued
68. Plaintiffs respectfully ask the court to schedule an initial hearing to determine if a
Temporary injunction should be granted against Defendants, enjoining the enforcement of GA-
69. Plaintiffs respectfully ask the Court, following trial on the merits, to issue a permanent
ATTORNEYS’ FEES
70. Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover “costs
and reasonable and necessary attorney's fees as are equitable and just.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.
71. Plaintiffs seek award of their reasonable attorney’s fees for the preparation of this suit,
VI. DAMAGES
15
a. Pecuniary loss, past and future;
b. Lost wages;
c. Actual Damages;
d. Pre and post-judgment interest;
e. Attorneys’ fees; and
f. All other relief afforded by the law that this Court deems appropriate.
73. Plaintiffs request that Defendants disclose the information and materials described in
VII. PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that upon trial hereof, the
court issue a Declaratory Judgment and Injunction against Defendants, and said Plaintiffs have
and recover such sums as would reasonably and justly compensate Plaintiffs in accordance with
the rules of law and procedure. In addition, Plaintiff prays for any further relief, either at law or in
Respectfully submitted,
By: _______________________________
Brent Webster
State Bar No. 24053545
George Edwards III
State Bar No. 24055438
Murtaza F. Sutarwalla
State Bar No. 24056398
Brent Webster
State Bar No. 24053545
1300 McGowen Street
Suite 270
16
Houston, Texas 77004
Phone: (832) 717-2562
Fax: (713) 583-8715
brent@eslawpartners.com
george@eslawpartners.com
murtaza@eslawpartners.com
17
GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT
Pursuant to his powers as Governor of the State of Texas, Greg Abbott has issued the following:
Executive Order No. GA-2$ relating to the targeted response to the COVID-19
disaster as part of the reopening of Texas.
tly submitted,
S
‘lerk to the Governor
GSD/gsd
Attachment
POST OFFICE Box 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VOICE) DIAL 7-1-1 FOR RELAY SERVICES
EXHIBIT A
3xrcuthir rirr
BY THE
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Executive Department
Austin, Texas
June 26, 2020
EXECUTIVE ORDER
GA28
WHEREAS, in each subsequent month effective through today, I have renewed the
disaster declaration for all Texas counties; and
WHEREAS, I have issued executive orders and suspensions of Texas laws in response to
COVIP- 19, aimed at protecting the health and safety of Texans and ensuring an
effective response to this disaster; and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Order GA-08 on March 19, 2020, mandating certain
social-distancing restrictions for Texans in accordance with guidelines promulgated by
President Donald I. Trump and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC);
and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Order GA-14 on March 31, 2020, expanding the social-
distancing restrictions for Texans based on guidance from health experts and the
President; and
WHEREAS, I subsequently issued Executive Orders GA-16, GA-18, GA-21, GA-23, and
GA-26 from April through early June 2020, aiming to achieve the least restrictive means
of combatting the threat to public health by continuing certain social-distancing
restrictions, while implementing a safe, strategic plan to Open Texas; and
least restrictive means for reducing the growing spread of COVID- 1 9 and the resulting
imminent threat to public health, and to avoid a need for more extreme measures; and
WHEREAS, everyone must act safely, and to that end, this executive order and prior
executive orders provide that all persons should follow the health protocols from DSHS,
which whenever achieved will mean compliance with the minimum standards for safely
reopening, but which should not be used to fault those who act in good faith but can only
substantially comply with the standards in light of scarce resources and other extenuating
COVID-19 circumstances; and
WHEREAS, the “governor is responsible for meeting the dangers to the state and
...
people presented by disasters” under Section 418.011 of the Texas Government Code,
and the legislature has given the governor broad authority to fulfill that responsibility;
and
WHEREAS, failure to comply with any executive order issued during the COVID-19
disaster is an offense punishable under Section 418. 173 by a fine not to exceed $1,000,
and may be subject to regulatory enforcement;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and
authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, and in
accordance with guidance from DSHS Commissioner Dr. Hellerstedt and other medical
advisors, the Governor’s Strike Force to Open Texas, the White House, and the CDC, do
hereby order the following on a statewide basis effective at noon on June 26, 2020:
JUN 2 6 2020
EXHIBIT A
Governor Greg Abbott Executive Order GA-28
June 26, 2020 Page 3
This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by local officials
in response to the COVID-19 disaster, but only to the extent that such a local order
restricts services allowed by this executive order, allows gatherings prohibited by
this executive order, or expands the list or scope of services as set forth in this
executive order. Pursuant to Section 418.0 16(a) of the Texas Government Code, I
hereby suspend Sections 418.1015(b) and 418.10$ of the Texas Government Code,
Chapter 81, Subchapter E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any other
relevant statutes, to the extent necessary to ensure that local officials do not impose
restrictions in response to the COVID-19 disaster that are inconsistent with this
executive order, provided that local officials may enforce this executive order as
well as local restrictions that are consistent with this executive order.
All existing state executive orders relating to COVTD-19 are amended to eliminate
confinement in jail as an available penalty for violating the executive orders. To the
extent any order issued by local officials in response to the COVID-19 disaster
would allow confinement in jail as an available penalty for violating a COVD-l9-
related order, that order allowing confinement in jail is superseded, and I hereby
suspend all relevant laws to the extent necessary to ensure that local officials do not
confine people in jail for violating any executive order or local order issued in
response to the COVJD-19 disaster.
This executive order supersedes Executive Order GA-26, but does not supersede
Executive Orders GA-b, GA-13, GA-17, GA-19, GA-24, GA-25, or GA-27. This
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF TH
SECRETARY OF STATE
‘4Si O1CLOCK
executive order shall remain in effect and in full force unless it is modified, amended,
rescinded, or superseded by the governor. This executive order may also be amended by
proclamation of the governor.
GREG ABBOTT
Governor
ATTES BY:
UTH R. HUGHS
Secretary of State
JUN 26 2020
EXHIBIT A
GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT
Pursuant to his powers as Governor of the State of Texas, Greg Abbott has issued the following:
Executive Order No. GA-18 relating to the expanded reopening of services as part
of the safe, strategic plan to Open Texas in response to the COVID- 19 disaster.
Respectfully submitted,
S
ye Clerk to the Governor
GSD/gsd
Attachment
POST OFFICE Box 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VOICE) DIAL 7-1-1 foR RELAY SERVICES
EXHIBIT B
xrcuthir iIrrr
BY THE
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Executive Department
Austin, Texas
April 27, 2020
EXECUTIVE ORDER
GA18
Relating to the expaizded reopening of services as part of the safe, strategic plan to
Open Texas in response to the COVID-19 disaster.
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2020, I issued a proclamation renewing the disaster declaration
for all counties in Texas; and
WHEREAS, I have issued executive orders and suspensions of Texas laws in response to
COVID-19, aimed at protecting the health and safety of Texans and ensuring an
effective response to this disaster; and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Order GA-08 on March 19, 2020, mandating certain
obligations for Texans in accordance with the President’s Coronavirus Guidelines for
America, as promulgated by President Donald J. Trump and the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) on March 16, 2020, which called upon Americans to take
actions to slow the spread of COVID-19 for 15 days; and
WHEREAS, shortly before Executive Order GA-08 expired, I issued Executive Order
GA- 14 on March 31, 2020, based on the President’s announcement that the restrictive
social-distancing Guidelines should extend through April 30, 2020, in light of advice
from Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, and also based on guidance by DSHS
Commissioner Dr. Hellerstedt and Dr. Birx that the spread of COVD-19 can be reduced
by minimizing social gatherings; and
WHEREAS, Executive Order GA-14 superseded Executive Order GA-08 and expanded
the social-distancing restrictions and other obligations for Texans that are aimed at
slowing the spread of COVID- 19, including by limiting social gatherings and in-person
contact with people (other than those in the same household) to providing or obtaining
“essential services,” and by expressly adopting federal guidance that provides a list of
critical-infrastructure sectors, workers, and functions that should continue as “essential
services” during the COVID-19 response; and
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY OF STATE
t PNX O’CLOCK
APR 2? 2020
EXHIBIT B
Governor Greg Abbott Executive Order GA-18
April 27, 2020 Page 2
WHEREAS, after more than two weeks of having in effect the heightened restrictions
like those required by Executive Order GA-14, which have saved lives, it was clear that
the disease still presented a serious threat across Texas that could persist in certain areas,
but also that COVID-19 had wrought havoc on many Texas businesses and workers
affected by the restrictions that were necessary to protect human life; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2020, I therefore issued Executive Order GA-l7, creating the
Governor’s Strike Force to Open Texas to study and make recommendations on safely
and strategically restarting and revitalizing all aspects of the Lone Star State—work,
school, entertainment, and culture; and
WHEREAS, also on April 17, 2020, I issued Executive Order GA-16 to replace
Executive Order GA- 14, and while Executive Order GA- 16 generally continued through
April 30, 2020, the same social-distancing restrictions and other obligations for Texans
according to federal guidelines, it offered a safe, strategic first step to Open Texas,
including permitting retail pick-up and delivery services; and
WHEREAS, Executive Order GA-16 is set to expire at 11:59 p.m. on April 30, 2020; and
WHEREAS, Texas must continue to protect lives while restoring livelihoods, both of
which can be achieved with the expert advice of medical professionals and business
leaders; and
WHEREAS, the “governor is responsible for meeting the dangers to the state and
...
people presented by disasters” under Section 418.0 11 of the Texas Government Code,
and the legislature has given the governor broad authority to fulfill that responsibility;
and
WHEREAS, under Section 418.012, the “governor may issue executive orders
hav[ingl the force and effect of law;” and
WHEREAS, under Section 4 18.016(a), the “governor may suspend the provisions of any
regulatory statute prescribing the procedures for conduct of state business if strict
...
compliance with the provisions ...would in any way prevent, hinder, or delay necessary
action in coping with a disaster;” and
WHEREAS, under Section 4 18.017(a), the “governor may use all available resources of
state government and of political subdivisions that are reasonably necessary to cope with
a disaster;” and
WHEREAS, under Section 4 18.018(c), the “governor may control ingress and egress to
and from a disaster area and the movement of persons and the occupancy of premises in
the area;” and
WHEREAS, under Section 4 18.173, failure to comply with any executive order issued
during the COVID-19 disaster is an offense punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000,
confinement in jail for a term not to exceed 180 days, or both fine and confinement.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and
authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, do hereby order
the following on a statewide basis effective immediately, and continuing through May 15,
2020, subject to extension based on the status of COVID-19 in Texas and the
recommendations of the Governor’s Strike Force to Open Texas, the White House
Coronavirus Task Force, and the CDC:
1_n accordance with guidance from DSHS Commissioner Dr. Hellerstedt, and to achieve
the goals established by the President to reduce the spread of COVD-19, every person in
Texas shall, except where necessary to provide or obtain essential services or reopened
services, minimize social gatherings and minimize in-person contact with people who
are not in the same household. People over the age of 65, however, are strongly
encouraged to stay at home as much as possible; to maintain appropriate distance from
any member of the household who has been out of the residence in the previous 14 days;
and, if leaving the home, to implement social distancing and to practice good hygiene,
environmental cleanliness, and sanitation.
“Reopened services” shall consist of the following to the extent they are not already
“essential services:”
1. Retail services that may be provided through pickup, delivery by mail, or delivery
to the customer’s doorstep.
2. Starting at 12:01 a.m. on Friday, May 1, 2020:
a) In-store retail services, for retail establishments that operate at up to 25
percent of the total listed occupancy of the retail establishment.
b) Dine-in restaurant services, for restaurants that operate at up to 25 percent of
the total listed occupancy of the restaurant; provided, however, that (a) this
applies only to restaurants that have less than 51 percent of their gross receipts
from the sale of alcoholic beverages and are therefore not required to post the
51 percent sign required by Texas law as determined by the Texas Alcoholic
Beverage Commission, and (b) valet services are prohibited except for
vehicles with placards or plates for disabled parking.
c) Movie theaters that operate at up to 25 percent of the total listed occupancy of
any individual theater for any screening.
d) Shopping malls that operate at up to 25 percent of the total listed occupancy of
the shopping mall; provided, however, that within shopping malls, the food-
court dining areas, play areas, and interactive displays and settings must
remain closed.
e) Museums and libraries that operate at up to 25 percent of the total listed
occupancy; provided, however, that (a) local public museums and local public
libraries may so operate only if permitted by the local government, and (b) any
components of museums or libraries that have interactive functions or
exhibits, including child play areas, must remain closed.
t) For Texas counties that have filed with DSHS, and are in compliance with, the
requisite attestation form promulgated by DSHS regarding five or fewer cases
of COVID- 19, those in-store retail services, dine-in restaurant services, movie
theaters, shopping malls, and museums and libraries, as otherwise defined and
limited above, may operate at up to 50 percent (as opposed to 25 percent) of
The conditions and limitations set forth above for reopened services shall not apply to
essential services. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the governor may by
proclamation identify any county or counties in which reopened services are thereafter
prohibited, in the governor’s sole discretion, based on the governor’s determination in
consultation with medical professionals that only essential services should be permitted
in the county, including based on factors such as an increase in the transmission of
COVTD-l 9 or in the amount of COVID- 19-related hospitalizations or fatalities.
Religious services should be conducted in accordance with the joint guidance issued and
updated by the attorney general and governor.
People shall avoid visiting bars, gyms, public swimming pools, interactive amusement
venues such as bowling alleys and video arcades, massage establishments, tattoo studios,
piercing studios, or cosmetology salons. The use of drive-thru, pickup, or delivery
options for food and drinks remains allowed and highly encouraged throughout the
limited duration of this executive order.
This executive order does not prohibit people from accessing essential or reopened
services or engaging in essential daily activities, such as going to the grocery store or gas
station, providing or obtaining other essential or reopened services, visiting parks,
hunting or fishing, or engaging in physical activity like jogging, bicycling, or other
outdoor sports, so long as the necessary precautions are maintained to reduce the
transmission of COVID-19 and to minimize in-person contact with people who are not
in the same household.
In accordance with the Guidelines from the President and the CDC, people shall not visit
nursing homes, state supported living centers, assisted living facilities, or long-term care
facilities unless to provide critical assistance as determined through guidance from the
Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC). Nursing homes, state
supported living centers, assisted living facilities, and long-term care facilities should
follow infection control policies and practices set forth by the HHSC, including
minimizing the movement of staff between facilities whenever possible.
In accordance with the Guidelines from the President and the CDC, schools shall remain
temporarily closed to in-person classroom attendance by students and shall not
recommence before the end of the 2019-2020 school year. Public education teachers and
staff are encouraged to continue to work remotely from home if possible, but may return
to schools to conduct remote video instruction, as well as perform administrative duties,
under the strict terms required by the Texas Education Agency. Private schools and
institutions of higher education should establish similar terms to allow teachers and staff
to return to schools to conduct remote video instruction and perform administrative
duties when it is not possible to do so remotely from home.
This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by local officials in
response to the COVID-19 disaster, but only to the extent that such a local order restricts
essential services or reopened services allowed by this executive order, allows gatherings
prohibited by this executive order, or expands the list of essential services or the list or
scope of reopened services as set forth in this executive order. I hereby suspend Sections
418.1015(b) and 418.10$ of the Texas Government Code, Chapter 81, Subchapter E of
the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any other relevant statutes, to the extent
necessary to ensure that local officials do not impose restrictions inconsistent with this
executive order, provided that local officials may enforce this executive order as well as
local restrictions that are consistent with this executive order.
This executive order supersedes Executive Order GA-16, but does not supersede
Executive Orders GA-b, GA-il, GA-l2, GA-13, GA-15, or GA-17. This executive
order shall remain in effect and in full force until 11:59 p.m. on May 15, 2020, unless it is
modified, amended, rescinded, or superseded by the governor.
GREG ABBOTT
Governor
ATTES BY:
FUTH R. HUGHS
Secretary of State
June 3, 2020
FILED N TH CFFCE OF THE
SECRETARY OF STATE
O’CLOCK
Pursuant to his powers as Governor of the State of Texas, Greg Abbott has issued the following:
Re :tfully submitted,
Attachment
POST OFFICE Box 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VoIcE) DIAL 7-1-1 FoR RELA’ SERVICES
EXHIBIT C
3xrcufir rbrr
BY THE
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Executive Department
Austin, Texas
June 3, 2020
EXECUTIVE ORDER
GA26
WHEREAS, in each subsequent month effective through today, I have renewed the
disaster declaration tbr all Texas counties; and
WHEREAS, I have issued executive orders and suspensions of Texas laws in response to
COVID-19, aimed at protecting the health and safety of Texans and ensuring an
effective response to this disaster; and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Order GA-Os on March 19, 2020, mandating certain
social-distancing restrictions for Texans in accordance with guidelines promulgated by
President Donald J. Trump and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC);
and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Order GA-14 on March 31, 2020, expanding the social-
distancing restrictions for Texans based on guidance from health experts and the
President; and
WHEREAS, I subsequently issued Executive Orders GA-l6, GA-iS, GA-21, and GA-23
over the course of April and May 2020, aiming to achieve the least restrictive means of
combatting the threat to public health by continuing certain social-distancing restrictions,
while implementing a safe, strategic plan to Open Texas; and
WHEREAS, as normal business operations resume, everyone must act safely, and to that
end, this executive order and prior executive orders provide that all persons should
follow the health protocols recommended by DSHS, which whenever achieved wiLl
mean compliance with the minimum standards for safely reopening, but which should
not be used to fault those who act in good faith but can only substantially comply with
the standards in light of scarce resources and other extenuating COVID-l9
circumstances; and
WHEREAS, the “governor is responsible for meeting the dangers to the state and
...
people presented by disasters” under Section 418.011 of the Texas Government Code,
and the legislature has given the governor broad authority to fulfill that responsibility;
and
WHEREAS, failure to comply with any executive order issued during the COVID- 19
disaster is an offense punishable under Section 418.173 by a fine notto exceed $1,000,
and may be subject to regulatory enforcement;
NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and
authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, and in
accordance with guidance from DSHS Commissioner Dr. Hellerstedt and other medical
advisors, the Governor’s Strike Force to Open Texas, the White House, and the CDC, do
hereby order the lollowtng on a statewide basis effective immediately:
People shall not visit nursing homes, state supported living centers, assisted living
facilities, or long-term care facilities unless as determined through guidance from
the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC). Nursing homes, state
supported living centers, assisted living facilities, and long-term care facilities
should follow infection control policies and practices set forth by HHSC, including
minimizing the movement of staff between facilities whenever possible.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the governor may by proclamation
add to the list of establishments or venues that people shall avoid visiting.
For the remainder of the 20 19-2020 school year, public schools may resume
operations for the summer as provided by, and under the minimum standard health
protocols found in, guidance issued by the Texas Education Agency (TEA). Private
schools and institutions of higher education are encouraged to establish similar
standards. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, schools may conduct
graduation ceremonies consistent with the minimum standard health protocols
found in guidance issued by TEA.
This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by local officials
in response to the COVID-19 disaster, but only to the extent that such a local order
restricts services allowed by this executive order, allows gatherings prohibited by
this executive order, or expands the list or scope of services as set forth in this
executive order. Pursuant to Section 418.0 16(a) of the Texas Government Code, I
hereby suspend Sections 418.1015(b) and 418. 108 of the Texas Government Code,
Chapter 81, Subchapter E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any other
relevant statutes, to the extent necessary to ensure that local officials do not impose
restrictions in response to the COVID-19 disaster that are inconsistent with this
executive order, provided that local officials may enforce this executive order as
well as local restrictions that are consistent with this executive order.
All existing state executive orders relating to COVID- 19 are amended to eliminate
confinement in jail as an available penalty for violating the executive orders. To the
extent any order issued by local officials in response to the COVID-19 disaster
would allow confinement in jail as an available penalty for violating a COVID-l9-
related order, that order allowing confinement in jail is superseded, and 1 hereby
suspend all relevant laws to the extent necessary to ensure that local officials do not
confine people in jail for violating any executive order or local order issued in
response to the COVID-19 disaster.
This executive order supersedes Executive Order GA-23, but does not supersede
Executive Orders GA-b, GA-13, GA-17, GA-19, GA-20, GA-24, or GA-25. This
executive order shall remain in effect and in full force unless it is modified, amended,
rescinded, or superseded by the governor. This executive order may also be amended by
proclamation of the governor.
GREG ABBOTT
Governor
ATTEST
RIJTH R. HUGHS
Secretary of State
JUN 03 2020
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT D
Challenge to Constitutionality of a State Statute Print
This form must be completed by a party filing a petition, motion or other pleading challenging the
constitutionality of a state statute. The completed form must be filed with the court in which the cause is
pending as required by Section 402.010 (a-1), Texas Government Code.
Cause Number (For Clerk Use Only): Court (For Clerk Use Only):
Styled: MARK BEATTY AND BACKWOODS SALOON LLC, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BRETT LIGON (in his Official Capacity), MONTGOMERY COUNTY SHERIFF, RAND HENDERSON (in his Official Capacity), and MONTGOMERY COUNTY CONSTABLE PRECINCT 3, RYAN
(e.g., John Smith v. All American Insurance Co.; in re Mary Ann Jones; In the Matter of the Estate of George Jackson)
Contact information for party* challenging the constitutionality of a state statute. (*If party is not a person, provide
contact information for party, party's representative or attorney.)
Name: Backwoods Saloon LLC/Mark Beatty via atty BrentWebster Telephone: 512-991-4550 xt.4
Address: 1300 McGowen St., Suite. 270 Fax: 7135838715
City/State/Zip: Houston, Texas 77004 State Bar No. (if applicable): 24053545
Email: brent@eslawpartners.com
Person completing this form is: ✔ Attorney for Party Unrepresented Party Other:
Identify the type of pleading you have filed challenging the constitutionality of a state statute.
Yes ✔ No
List the state statute(s) being challenged in your pleading and provide a summary of the basis for your
challenge. (Additional pages may be attached if necessary.)
This action is Challenging Governor Abbott's Executive Order GA-28 to enjoin its enforcement in Montgomery County, Texas.
9/5/13