This browser does not support the Video element.
Restaurant worker reacts to Michigan Court of Appeals ruling that state's Covid rules were excessive
Now the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that Michigan’s top health leaders used power that they did not have to put those indoor dining rules in place to begin with.
NORTHVILLE TWP., Mich. (FOX 2) - Restaurants who struggled during the Covid pandemic scored a court victory Friday.
The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Michigan's top leaders did not have the power to put indoor dining restrictions in place.
"Changing literally from one day to the other. We couldn’t do any dine-in. That definitely was a huge challenge, a huge deal," said Paulo.
He manages the team over at Rebecca's Family Restaurant & Ice Cream Parlor in Northville and can’t help but think back to those tough times during the height of Covid and the major restrictions State officials placed on restaurants and bars.
"Both us as businesses but also as clients," he said. "We could have taken other actions to make sure it was safe. We don’t deny Covid. We know it happened. We were affected by it as well. But we could have done something that was a little less intense."
Now the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Michigan’s top health leaders used power they did not have to put those indoor dining rules in place to begin with.
"A lot of things were happening back then and I know that the State was also trying to do their best but they have overstepped a little bit," Paulo said.
That’s exactly how the state Court of Appeals saw it…saying the restrictions were "an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power."
"It was very scary times," he said. "We had like 15 - 20 employees at the time and we had to cut down to three to four if that, and that was probably the scariest part."
Many business owners blasted Governor Whitmer’s office and state leaders saying the Covid era policies were excessive and were unnecessarily killing business.
The issue became a huge political football while business owners and managers were left to navigate the uncertainty.
The ruling essentially says that such policies could have been put in place through the legislative process.
"By opinion dated October 2, 2020, our Supreme Court determined that the Governor did not possess authority under the EMA to declare a 'state of emergency' or ‘state of disaster’ based on the COVID-19 pandemic after April 30, 2020," the ruling said. "And that the Governor does not possess the authority to exercise emergency powers under the EPGA "because that act is an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution.
"The concentration of power in the hands of so few may be efficient and sometimes popular. But it does not tend toward sound government. However wise one person or his advisors may be, that is no substitute for the wisdom of the whole of the American people that can be tapped in the legislative process."
Paulo said the decisions made by state leaders impacted the restaurant's workforce.
"Dealing with staff, we have single moms that work here. We have recently divorced parents and literally every bit of background we employ here," he said. "So that was I think the worst part."
The appeal came from a filing at the Michigan Court of Claims two years ago, after the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services issued the controversial policies.
While the new ruling stirs up the debate once again, restaurant professionals like Paulo are just glad they made it through.
"It was huge I mean the amount of support was so intense," he said. "People were giving gift cards and things just to help us but I’m definitely amazed, thankful and very grateful that we’re here."