When it comes to the practice of yoga, there are a bevy of permutations. The combination of exercising and meditation continues to grow in popularity. Traditional styles such as Hatha and Vinyasa have been joined by Bikram (think really hot), prenatal (think really pregnant), and offshoots that involve beer bottles or baby goats. Having yoga classes on the beach or an ocean-adjacent park sounds like a perfect location for reflective stretching. Who would possibly object?
The city of San Diego, apparently. It passed a ban on holding yoga classes in those locations. Stating that it didn't contain expressive content and was thus in violation of city code, a San Diego trial judge sided with the city in denying two yoga teachers a preliminary injunction in 2024. A Ninth Circuit appellate panel overturned the decision on June 4, 2025, ruling that the lower court was in error about yoga not being covered under the First Amendment.
If Dogs Are Permitted, Why Not Downward-Facing Dog?
In 1993, San Diego added a municipal code that provided guidelines for what was and wasn't permitted on the city's beaches and coastal parks. Among other regulations, it set out restrictions for commercial activities taking place in those locations and what sort of requirements (such as a permit) would be necessary.
In 2016, a San Diego Superior Court Commissioner ruled that a city code stating yoga classes given on the beach and in parks for free were in violation was unconstitutional. San Diego Deputy City Attorney Heather Ferbert responded by issuing a memorandum contesting that yoga was not protected under First Amendment rights by citing Dallas v. Stanglin and Daly v. Harris.
As the wheels of bureaucracy can sometimes move slowly, it wasn't until February 2024 that the San Diego City Council issued an ordinance amendment that specifically addressed yoga and the beaches. It codified the argument that yoga was not expressive content and placed it in the same category as other prohibited commercial beach activities such as dog training, professional massages, and fitness classes.
Steven Hubbard and Amy Baack were both yoga instructors who found themselves barred from teaching classes in oceanfront parks after the amendment by barricades and San Diego park rangers. When they inquired about obtaining a permit, they were told the city didn't issue permits for fitness classes to be held in the specified locations.
The two decided to seek relief in court. Their justification was two-pronged: yoga did indeed contain expressive content, and since their classes on the beach were done for free, they were not commercial enterprises.
Their first attempt for a preliminary injunction that would allow them to begin teaching their classes in the banned locations didn't fare well, as a Southern California district judge agreed with San Diego's opinion of yoga's content. Undaunted, they took their peaceful fight to the next legal level.
Time for One of the Warrior Poses
Hubbard and Baack had better success with an appellate panel from the Ninth Circuit, which bestowed a unanimous ruling in their favor. The trio of judges decreed that yoga did indeed contain expressive content. This had the dual effect of granting First Amendment constitutional protections and placing free yoga classes outside of the purview of the San Diego code that had prohibited them. The panel reasoned that if a similar combination of exercise and meditation, like tai-chi, is permitted in parks and on the beach, why not yoga?
The 9th Circuit sent the case back to the district court with instructions to issue the preliminary injunction sought by Hubbard and Baack. Representatives for San Diego said the city was considering its next steps. In the meantime, yoga practitioners can enjoy saying "namaste" to the Pacific Ocean as it provides a stunning background for their classes.
Related Resources
- How Can I Sue the City? (FindLaw's Learn About the Law)
- Appealing a Court Decision or Judgement (FindLaw's Filing a Lawsuit)
- Ninth Circuit Concludes Epic Seven-Year Parking Ticket Legal Fight (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
