It was late March 2020. The air in Raleigh was thick with pollen and an eerie, quiet panic. For owners of "private bars"—establishments in North Carolina that serve drinks but no food—the world didn't just slow down. It stopped. While restaurants eventually got the green light to flip their signs to "Open" and wineries were pouring flights, the local dive bars and cocktail lounges remained shuttered by executive fiat. This disparity triggered a massive legal battle that is still shaking the rafters of the state’s highest courts today.
Basically, the covid bar lawsuits nc saga is a story about who gets to decide what a "necessary" business is and whether the government owes you a check when they lock your doors for 400 days.
The 400-Day Hangover
If you're looking for the heart of the grievance, look at the timeline. Governor Roy Cooper’s executive orders weren't just a blanket "stay at home." They were a complex, and some say arbitrary, "dimmer switch" approach. By the summer of 2020, you could grab a burger and a beer at a restaurant. You could go to a brewery or a distillery. You could even get a tattoo.
But if you owned a place like Club 519 in Greenville or a neighborhood tavern that didn't have a kitchen? You were stuck in limbo.
Crystal and Rob Waldron, who ran Club 519, watched as neighboring businesses reopened while their own livelihoods stayed dark. They weren't alone. Scores of bar owners formed the North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association (NCBATA) to fight back. Their argument was simple: "Why is the beer at a restaurant safer than the beer at my bar?"
🔗 Read more: Johnny Somali AI Deepfake: What Really Happened in South Korea
Honestly, the state’s answer—that bars were inherently higher risk due to "learned behavior" like mingling and shouting—didn't sit well with people watching their life savings evaporate.
The "Fruits of Their Own Labor" Ruling
Fast forward to August 2025. The North Carolina Supreme Court finally handed down a pair of massive decisions in Howell v. Cooper and North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association v. Stein. For a long time, the state tried to hide behind "sovereign immunity," basically a legal shield that says you can't sue the government unless they let you.
The court’s Republican majority, led by Chief Justice Paul Newby, essentially threw that shield in the trash.
They pointed to a specific, unique part of the North Carolina Constitution: the "Fruits of Their Own Labor" clause. It sounds old-fashioned, but it's powerful. It basically says that every citizen has a fundamental right to enjoy the rewards of their own hard work. The court ruled that when the government shuts down a specific class of business for over a year while letting competitors stay open, they have to prove—with actual evidence, not just "because I said so" logic—that it was reasonably necessary.
💡 You might also like: Sweden School Shooting 2025: What Really Happened at Campus Risbergska
Why this matters for the future
- Evidence over Edict: The state can no longer just cite "science and data" in a vague way. They have to show that the specific distinction between a bar and a restaurant was scientifically backed at the time.
- Trial Path: These cases are headed back to trial judges. This means bar owners might actually get to dig through the internal emails and data the Governor's office used to make those 2020 decisions.
- The Payday Question: If the bar owners win at trial, the state might be on the hook for millions in damages. We're talking about compensation for lost revenue, rent, and ruined inventory.
The Dissenting View: A "Roving License"
Not everyone is cheering. The court’s Democratic justices, including Anita Earls and Allison Riggs, were pretty scathing in their dissents. Justice Earls argued that the majority was giving themselves a "roving license" to second-guess political leaders during a once-in-a-century health crisis.
From their perspective, the Governor had to make split-second decisions to save lives. If every emergency order can be picked apart by a judge years later, they worry the government will be paralyzed the next time a crisis hits. It’s a classic tension: individual property rights versus collective public safety.
What Bar Owners Should Do Now
If you were one of the hundreds of North Carolina businesses affected by these shutdowns, the legal landscape has shifted in your favor, but it’s not a "free money" situation yet. The Supreme Court didn't say the bars won the whole war; they just said the bars have the right to keep fighting.
The "Fruits of Labor" test is "fact-intensive." This means the trial court is going to look at things like:
📖 Related: Will Palestine Ever Be Free: What Most People Get Wrong
- Did your bar have outdoor seating?
- Did you try to implement safety protocols that were ignored by the state?
- Can you prove exactly how much you lost compared to nearby restaurants?
Actionable Steps for Business Owners
Gather your 2020-2021 financial records. If these lawsuits result in a settlement fund or a massive judgment, you'll need airtight documentation of your losses during those 400+ days of restricted operation.
Keep tabs on the NCBATA. The North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association is the lead plaintiff in one of the major cases. They often provide updates for member bars on how to join class actions or submit evidence.
Consult with a constitutional litigator. General business attorneys might not be familiar with the "Fruits of Their Own Labor" clause. It’s a niche area of NC law that is suddenly very relevant.
The covid bar lawsuits nc aren't just about a few shuttered taverns anymore. They've become a landmark moment for North Carolina’s constitution, setting a precedent that even in a declared emergency, the government's power isn't absolute. Whether you think the lockdowns were a necessary evil or a massive overreach, the courts have decided that the people who paid the price deserve their day in court.