A law firm representing several high school athletes challenging California’s direction for youth sports amid the pandemic says it has talked with the state’s counsel about updates to the guidelines that would settle the disputes from a growing list of lawsuits.
San Diego-based attorney Ian Friedman, a partner with Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Juskie, said the discussions have occurred “the last several days” as the two sides move closer toward a critical hearing in San Diego Superior Court on Friday, March 6. “The talks are ongoing,” Friedman said. “Nothing finalized.”
Friedman and attorney Stephen Grebing have filed at least six lawsuits against the state and counties, including one in Orange County on March 1, that essentially argue under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment that high school students have not been treated fairly because collegiate and professional athletes have been allowed to compete during the pandemic and they have not.
The lawsuits name Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and the home counties of the student-athletes. The athletes also are from San Diego, San Mateo, San Francisco, Contra Costa and San Bernardino.
The California Health and Human Services Agency has said the state is weighing its legal options, and the state attorney general’s office has referred questions to Newsom’s office and the CDPH.
The Orange County lawsuit, filed by five athletes who compete in indoor sports, takes aim on the state’s guidelines that don’t allow indoor basketball, volleyball, or wrestling. The lawsuits request that high school athletes, via a temporary restraining order, be allowed to play under the same safety protocols used by college or professional sports.
Indoor high school sports aren’t allowed under the state’s guidelines until a county reaches the optimal yellow tier (minimal risk) in the state’s COVID-19 monitoring system, which features an adjusted, daily case rate less than 1 per 100,000 people.
The state recently modified its youth sports guidelines to allow outdoor, high-contact sports such as football, water polo, soccer and lacrosse to be played in counties that have an adjusted case rate of 14 or less per 100,000 people. Water polo and football are required to conduct weekly testing until health conditions improve further.
Llast month, San Diego Superior Court Judge Earl H. Maas granted two San Diego football players a temporary restraining order that essentially nixed the state’s plan and cleared the way for all high school athletes in San Diego County to compete under the same protocol as college or professional sports.
The college guidelines generally require more stringent testing than high schools. Friedman counters those concerns, and questions about cost, by saying the option is better than not playing at all.
“There’s no plan for indoor sports right now,” he said.
Grebing centered his argument before Maas around a declaration by Monica Gandhi, a Harvard-trained physician and professor of medicine and infectious disease at the University of San Francisco. She stated there is “no epidemiological difference in how COVID-19 would potentially spread in any sport competition were that sport were to be played by youth/high school athletes as opposed to college/professional athletes.”
He capped his presentation by talking about the growing emotional strain on youth due to the lack of sports competition.
Darin Wessel, representing the state attorney general’s office in the hearing, presented the state’s responsibility and challenges with public health amid the pandemic.
The hearing Friday, which will again feature Maas on the bench, is for a preliminary injunction, which could preserve the temporary restraining order until trial or deliver a victory for the state. A trial could make the order, which expires March 9, permanent.
The way Friedman sees it, he and Grebing are following two paths toward hearing: preparing for a key ruling, and discussing a potential resolution.
from Irvine Business Signs https://ift.tt/2NYqeG4
via Irvine Sign Company
