Conservative activists suing the city of San Antonio claiming it violated Texas’ “save chick-fil-a” law have presented no evidence of a violation, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday morning when it ruled the Case referred back to a court.
The case follows a 2019 city council decision to deny the chain’s application to open a restaurant at San Antonio International Airport because a council member supports Christian groups with anti-LGBTQ agendas through the company.
Later that year, Gov. Greg Abbott signed legislation – Chick-fil-A-Mug in hand – into law, allowing any individual to sue governments that have taken “adverse action” against businesses because of their support for religious organizations .
A group of people from the San Antonio area, including conservative activist and former council candidate Patrick von Dohlen, are suing the city under the new law. They are represented by attorney Jonathan Mitchell, a former attorney general who helped draft the legislation, and are supported by amicus briefs from 62 Republican lawmakers and Abbott.
The judges said the plaintiffs “did not allege enough facts” to sue a government agency for official action. The court said actions taken prior to the law’s enactment could not be considered violations of the law, and past actions could not be used to presume that the city would break the law in the future.
“More importantly, we do not believe that the City’s conduct in March 2019 alone would reasonably conclude that there was a ‘credible threat’ of adverse City action against Chick-fil-A after September 1, 2019.” ‘ according to the court decision. “Actually, the opposite is the case. Instead of assuming the city would violate (the law), we assume the city would comply (the law) until proven otherwise.”
The case took years to even make it to the state Supreme Court, so Friday’s ruling is a major setback for plaintiffs.
“Happily, the Supreme Court has recognized that the plaintiffs have not alleged a violation of the law. The fact is that the city has not violated the law and will not violate it in the future. This case should be closed and plaintiffs should stop wasting taxpayers’ money,” said city attorney Neel Lane.
Supporters of the lawsuit against the city also welcomed the decision, saying that while the Supreme Court overturned its legal reasoning and remanded the case to a lower court, it did not side with a lower court inclined to dismiss the case outright survived the legal challenge.
“We are grateful that this case can move forward to protect religious freedom,” wrote Jonathan Saenz, the president and attorney for Texas Values, a conservative advocacy group that filed on behalf of the plaintiffs.
In September 2020, as part of an agreement with then-President Donald Trump’s Federal Aviation Administration, the city offered Chick-fil-A the original airport space.
Chick-fil-a declined, and Whataburger is slated to open this spring instead.