Bellmawr, NJ — The legal battle over the business license of two New Jersey gym owners who defied COVID-19 lockdown orders has reached a new conclusion. The New Jersey appeals court has ruled that the business license of Ian Smith and Frank Trumbetti, co-owners of Atilis Gym in Bellmawr, will remain revoked. This decision comes after a prolonged legal struggle in which the gym owners sought to have their license reinstated.
Background of the Case
The controversy began early in the COVID-19 pandemic when Smith and Trumbetti made headlines for their outspoken defiance of state and local lockdown measures. Despite Governor Phil Murphy’s executive orders mandating the closure of nonessential businesses, including gyms, Atilis Gym remained open. The gym’s owners held public rallies, made national media appearances, and even posted a viral video of Smith kicking down wooden barriers that authorities had erected to block the entrance to their business.
In response to their actions, the Bellmawr Borough’s mayor and council revoked the gym’s mercantile license. The revocation was based on the gym’s blatant disregard for COVID restrictions and subsequent court orders.
Appeal and Court Decision
Smith and Trumbetti appealed the revocation of their license, arguing that it was a retaliatory action against their exercise of First Amendment rights. Their legal team contended that the borough’s decision was politically motivated rather than a legitimate enforcement of public health measures.
However, the three-judge panel of the New Jersey appellate court rejected these claims. The court found that the borough’s decision to revoke the license was not retaliatory but was based on the gym owners’ violations of state COVID-19 orders.
“Contrary to plaintiffs’ assertions, the record contains no evidence that defendant revoked their license as retaliation for the exercise of their First Amendment rights,” the court ruling stated. The judges emphasized that the borough’s actions were consistent with enforcing state health regulations, and the revocation did not infringe upon the gym owners’ general right to work but rather restricted them from operating in a specific capacity within the municipality.
Reactions and Legal Implications
Stuart A. Platt, attorney for the borough and its officials, expressed satisfaction with the ruling. “The decision upholds the rule of law and reinforces Bellmawr’s decision to do what’s best for the public health and safety of its residents,” Platt told Patch. His comments highlight the court’s endorsement of the borough’s approach to managing public health during the pandemic.
The ruling follows a series of legal skirmishes involving Smith and Trumbetti. Despite facing over 80 summonses for violating New Jersey’s COVID protocols, the charges against them were dropped last spring. The court’s recent decision, however, underscores the limits of legal redress in this case.
Looking Forward
As of now, Smith and Trumbetti’s efforts to regain their business license have been thwarted. The court’s decision marks a significant moment in the broader discussion about the balance between individual rights and public health during crises. The case has sparked debates about the extent to which businesses and individuals can challenge government orders, especially when public health is at stake.
The New Jersey appeals court’s ruling reaffirms the authority of local governments to enforce public health orders during emergencies. While the decision is a setback for Ian Smith and Frank Trumbetti, it reinforces the importance of adhering to state regulations designed to protect the public during a global pandemic. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, this case serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in navigating rights and responsibilities during unprecedented times.
