All Jason Murchison wanted was to teach others how to surf. Now, he gets his wish.
The Navy veteran, diver and surfer reached a legal settlement with Newport Beach, Calif., on July 28 that secures him the right to teach paid surf lessons on city beaches. It concludes a federal lawsuit that the Learn to Surf owner filed last year, allowing him to operate under the same five-year agreement that was previously granted to the three other city-approved surf schools.
Murchison was represented pro bono by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a national nonprofit law firm that defends Americans threatened by government overreach and abuse. The suit challenged Newport Beach’s unlawful restrictions on surf lessons, with Murchison's legal counsel saying the case was in violation of their client's First Amendment rights.
While the city attempted to have the case dismissed, the district court allowed Murchison's First Amendment and illegal monopolization claims to proceed. Attorneys said the legal victory restores their client's fundamental right to earn a living, and in effect protects the rights of all entrepreneurs to do the same for themselves, consumers and their communities.
Caleb Trotter, a senior attorney with PLF, said that Newport Beach cannot just automatically cap competition to three surf schools, as it stifles competition and entrepreneurship in a free market.
"The agreements that the city has with the other three schools—they're three-year agreements, they're renewable—and they basically said, 'Alright, we'll just end the litigation because we defeated their motion to dismiss,'" Trotter told Military.com. "That was their first attempt just to get the case thrown out.
"But the court said that our First Amendment and antitrust claims could go forward. So, instead of doing that and potentially having the court say that their whole ordinance was unconstitutional or illegal, they said, 'We'll just give you the agreement.' ... In the end, that's all he wanted was to operate and be on the same footing as everyone else. He didn't want any special treatment."
How Murchison's Legal Case Began
Murchison, a father who attended college in Hawaii, linked up with PLF in the latter half of 2024. But the story goes back even further.
After serving his country in the Navy, Murchison returned to his native Orange County, Calif., earned a law degree, and enveloped himself in surfing. He began giving surf lessons part-time, according to PLF, and in 2016 developed his passion into a business venture now known as Learn to Surf.
He and his business' expert instructors have served thousands of people of all skill levels, although most of his clientele are beginners. Surfers receiving lessons have run the gamut, from 4-year-olds to wounded military veterans and people in substance abuse recovery.
But the business was on shaky ground due to a Newport Beach ordinance that bans paid private instruction on public beaches in the city. Free surf lessons are OK and not legally punishable, but according to the provision enacted in 2012, anyone who wants to teach anything on city beaches in exchange for a fee is first required to get written permission from city officials.
PLF said that the process was convoluted, explaining that "there is no clear process for getting that permission, no standards for who qualifies, and no explanation provided for who gets approved while others are denied."
"The ordinance is very vague," Trotter said. "It basically just says that you can't provide any instruction on city beaches or parks unless you have an agreement with the city. It doesn't give any specific criteria the city has to follow; any process for someone to start that process.
"He was basically just contacting the city recreation department saying, 'OK, can I apply or something?' And they just said, 'Well, we've got enough now, try again next year.' So, he did that for several years and then realized that he was just getting the runaround. They were never going to let him operate, so he started looking at his legal options and he found us."
Prior, Murchison struck out twice—in both 2015 and 2016—when he sought the required permission but was twice denied. The city's reasoning was that no additional surf instructors were “needed.”
Also, just one month after he incorporated his business in 2016, Newport Beach enforced its ban against Murchison for allegedly teaching surf lessons on city beaches. A settlement reached in 2017 was later followed by a July 2024 court order approving the city’s demand that he pay nearly $19,000 in fines and fees.
PLF said that his case is not an outlier. Since 2012, Newport Beach has granted permission to just three surf companies—including two that only operate in summer months. Those that are granted permission must hand over 20% to 30% of lesson fees to the city.
Similar Ordinances in California
Ordinances, like the one at the center of the Murchison case, are not uncommon across California.
Trotter explained that if one looks at a map, starting at the Mexican border and going up to the Bay Area, they'd find that most cities and counties have some restrictions on surf instruction.
The way Newport does it is a minority perspective of governance in the sense that there's really no process that's articulated, Trotter added, with others like Santa Cruz similar in their measures.
"Others focus more on health and safety aspects, making sure there's not a problem," he said. "But very few have this very monopolistic practice of you can operate if we say you can without there being any regular process or renewal for other people to come in and compete.
"We have another lawsuit against state parks further south, and there's a state regulation involving state parks and state beaches that's that's actually pretty similar."
First Amendment Case at its Core
While the case was about city ordinances and surf lessons, Trotter said at its core it hinged on the First Amendment.
"Teaching people how to do things is protected speech, and the district court in rejecting the city's motion to dismiss agreed. ... The city, in order to successfully defend the lawsuit, would ultimately have to justify that law under the stringent scrutiny that the First Amendment provides, and so that was the primary legal argument," he said.
Regarding the notion of limited competition, he added that they had an antitrust argument based on that.
Trotter said that's likely where most people will sympathize with Murchison's efforts. The lawsuit wasn't due to not wanting people to surf, but because Newport didn't want schools anymore.
"I think from the city's standpoint, it was just an anti-competitive measure and they wouldn't say it that way," he said. "But that was the practical effect of it, to eliminate competition."