By Brett Barrouquere

Law360 (April 9, 2021, 5:03 PM EDT) -- Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp is asking a state judge to dismiss a challenge to his COVID-19 executive orders, saying complaints by the business owners who sued are vague and that they haven't specified which orders they are challenging and why.

In a 71-page motion filed Thursday in Fulton County Superior Court, Kemp also argued the business owners are barred from suing the governor and seeking monetary damages under the sovereign immunity doctrine and they should have named the state as a defendant instead of the governor.

Kemp said the COVID-19 orders issued in November don't violate the due process rights of the business owners.

"The executive orders designed to protect the health of Georgians against a deadly, contagious disease do not rise to the level of a taking or any other type of due process violation," Kemp said.

A group of 11 Georgians and a newly formed nonprofit, I Do Not Comply Inc., sued in February, asking a state court judge to declare Kemp's emergency orders unconstitutional and award unspecified damages for their loss of livelihood and inability to see vulnerable loved ones who are in quarantine.

The plaintiffs, including a barber, dance schools operator, wedding band leader and martial arts business manager, said they lost income because Kemp's orders required them and many others in commerce to only perform the minimal necessary activities.

The plaintiffs claimed a variety of violations of the Georgia constitution and U.S. Constitution regarding their rights to not be deprived of life, liberty or property, nor equal protection or privacy.

While the orders aimed at protecting public health may be broad, Kemp said, they are all within the legal powers of the governor's office. And the plaintiffs haven't cited any specifics about how they are being hurt by the orders or given examples of alleged constitutional violations, Kemp said.

"In this case, the General Assembly has granted the Governor substantial powers to manage public health emergencies," Kemp said.

The executive orders were written narrowly with the intent of protecting public health and to allow the state to share vaccination information with the federal government, a move that will eventually allow the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions, Kemp said.

"At this moment, it would be difficult to find a more compelling state interest than accomplishing this vaccination program, especially since doing so could and likely will result in the ultimate lifting of all the other restrictions that plaintiffs deem so onerous," Kemp said.

The order restricting gatherings and visitations to nursing homes, in-patient hospice and assisted living facilities during a pandemic isn't a violation of the First Amendment because the orders are of limited duration, Kemp said.

"First, the state's interest in preventing the spread of COVID-19 and protecting individuals' health is a substantial — indeed, compelling —state interest," Kemp said.

Kemp's office declined to comment. Jordan "Alex" Johnson of Bernard & Johnson LLC, who represents the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment Friday.

Gov. Brian Kemp is represented by Attorney General Christopher Carr and Kathleen Pacious, Susan Teaster, Laura L. Lones, Deborah Nolan Gore and James Champlin of the Georgia Attorney General's Office.

The plaintiffs are represented by Jordan "Alex" Johnson of Bernard & Johnson LLC.

The case is Tracy Smart et al., v. Gov. Brian Kemp, case number 2021CV345317, in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia.

--Editing by Michael Watanabe.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.