A group of Athens bars and onetime bar employees dropped a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law forbidding anyone under the age of 21 from entering or working in a bar.
The suit was dismissed with prejudice in the wake of a June opinion by the Georgia Supreme Court that effectively barred any lawsuits challenging the enforcement of purportedly unconstitutional laws. The Athens Association for Constitutional Rights, a coalition of five bars, joined three individual plaintiffs who worked as bartenders, doormen and barbacks before they were fired last year after Gov. Nathan Deal signed "Michael's Law" into effect.
The law was enacted last year in response to the 2014 death of Michael Gatto at the hands of a 20-year-old bouncer at Rude Rudy's Bar in Statesboro. The original legislation barred anyone younger than 18 from serving or selling alcohol unless it was sold for off-site consumption in a supermarket, convenience store or other retail establishment.
The bill was redrafted to bar anyone under 21 from entering a bar unless accompanied by a parent, guardian or spouse older than 21.
The lawsuit targeted the Georgia Department of Revenue and Commissioner Lynne Riley, who were charged with enforcing the law. It sought declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing the law violates equal protection guarantees by discriminating against bars, which are treated differently than other establishments serving alcohol, as well as bar employees singled out because of their age.
It was also claimed that the law violated bar employees' due process rights by infringing on their "fundamental right to make a living in their chosen occupations."
The state Law Department countered that it's protected by sovereign immunity, including complaints for injunctive and declaratory relief, and sought to have the case dismissed.
Judge Shawn LaGrua denied the motion for a preliminary injunction but reserved ruling on the motion to dismiss until the Georgia Supreme Court decided a pending case, Lathrop v. Deal (No. S17A0196), which dealt with the then-unresolved question of whether claims brought under the Georgia Constitution were barred by sovereign immunity.
That case involved a challenge to a Georgia law banning abortions after 20 weeks in nearly all circumstances. Three doctors argued the ban violated their patients' right to privacy and equal protection by limiting their access to abortion services and by allowing prosecutors access to their medical records.
In June, a unanimous high court declared that legal actions against the state were barred by sovereign immunity unless it expressly waived those protections.