The Supreme Court has turned away, without explanation, an appeal from a group of Minneapolis business owners who say the city's response to the unrest after George Floyd's 2020 killing — concrete barricades and a long-term pullback of police protection at the intersection where he died — wrecked their livelihoods.

The case, Cup Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis (No. 26-222), was denied as part of a routine order list released Monday, November 9, following the justices' weekend conference — one of more than 200 cases the court declined to hear that day, according to SCOTUSblog. As is custom with most cert denials, the court gave no reasoning for passing on the case.

The dispute centers on East 38th Street and Chicago Avenue — the intersection that became the memorial site known as George Floyd Square after his murder by former officer Derek Chauvin. The businesses, including the Cup Foods convenience store near the memorial, argued that the city of Minneapolis effectively abandoned the area for years, erecting barricades that blocked traffic and customers while declining to maintain a normal police presence long after the initial unrest subsided. Their $30 million lawsuit claimed the barriers amounted to an unconstitutional taking of their property.

Three Strikes Before Reaching the Justices

The petitioners had already lost twice before asking the Supreme Court to step in: a Hennepin County judge dismissed the suit, and the Minnesota Court of Appeals and Minnesota Supreme Court both declined to revive it. Their case sat before the U.S. Supreme Court through multiple conferences before it was finally denied Monday.

The same order list disposed of a wide swath of unrelated petitions, a reminder of how much routine judicial business moves through the court's order lists compared with the small number of cases it actually agrees to argue each term.

THE JUSTICES GAVE NO REASONING FOR PASSING ON THE CASE

George Floyd Square has remained a flashpoint in Minneapolis politics for more than five years, with city officials repeatedly promising reconstruction plans that would reopen the intersection to traffic while preserving a permanent memorial. Business owners along the corridor have said the slow pace of those plans, combined with reduced foot traffic and periodic street closures, drove away customers and, in some cases, forced closures.

With the Supreme Court declining to intervene, the businesses' legal options are largely exhausted; the lower rulings against them stand. Minneapolis officials have not commented publicly on the denial, and it remains unclear whether the city plans any further changes to the intersection's traffic and policing arrangements following the court's decision.