by Dorian Hargrove / Times of San Diego / June 25, 2026
The public fight over yoga in San Diego city parks and at popular beaches is far from entering the final stretch.
As the city and yoga teacher Steve Hubbard, known by his moniker NamaSteve, and teacher Amy Baack, are embroiled in two public court battles over whether free yoga classes should be considered a First Amendment right, Yoga instructor Hubbard has thrown yet another proverbial punch.
Meanwhile, the city of San Diego is digging in its heels on the previously filed federal and state lawsuits and attempting to subpoena the financial information of the yoga practitioners who donated to Hubbard and fellow yoga instructors, in hopes of proving that the students were paying a fee for the yoga classes.
On June 22, Hubbard filed a third lawsuit against the city of San Diego over the three citations issued by San Diego Park rangers to Hubbard in 2025, in the weeks following a federal court order that stated the city’s interpretation was unconstitutional.
Hubbard’s lawsuit says the first of the three citations came on May 6, 2025, four months after a federal court judge ruled that the city’s ordinance, as written, “substantially overburdens speech by prohibiting any individual from providing any lecture to a group of any size on any subject in any San Diego public park or beach at any time.”
On that day, rangers, according to Hubbard’s new lawsuit, cited the yoga instructor for violating the city law that bans commercial activity in public parks and at beaches.
The tickets didn’t stop there.
On May 24, two of the same rangers drove to Hubbard’s home and issued yet another citation, this time alleging Hubbard violated the same law when he live-streamed a yoga class from the backyard of his Pacific Beach home.
Then, the following day, Hubbard received yet another ticket for teaching a class at the park for financial gain and for giving a lecture in a public park.
“Even after the U.S. District Court ruled the city’s ordinance prohibiting ‘giving any lecture’ in a city park violated the First Amendment, park rangers continued citing our client for this, including going to his home and citing him for teaching yoga online because it could be viewed in a park,” said attorney Bryan Pease of Pease & Ijadi, the law firm that brought the case.
As the city faces yet another lawsuit over yoga and other expressive activities in public parks, attorneys for the city are ramping up their fight against Hubbard and the practitioners who donated money to him for his classes.
In newly released subpoenas, obtained by Times of San Diego, attorneys for the city are seeking to subpoena all of Hubbard’s financial records, including bank statements, Venmo and Zelle payments, social media messages, and GPS records for Hubbard and Baack, in hopes of showing the scope of Hubbard and Baack’s alleged commercial enterprise. To do so, San Diego city attorneys are also requesting the GPS records of the students who donated to Hubbard and Baack.
Attorney Pease says he is asking a judge to void the subpoenas.
“Now the city is going so far as to issue subpoenas to Venmo and other third parties for GPS tracking information of yoga students when they made donations, which we are moving to quash.”
A San Diego Superior Court Judge will decide on whether or not to let the subpoenas move forward at a July 17 hearing. Trial in the preceding state court case is now set for January of next year.
San Diego City Attorney’s Office declined to comment due to pending litigation.
I’m really for the City on this in their efforts to get rid of the yoga classes on Park property, especially on the Sunset Cliffs Natural Park. Trying to subpoena the financial and other records of the sponsors of this activity is exactly the right thing to do, and it seems someone in the City is aggressively pursuing this. If successful it may help end similar exploitation of the Cliffs.
/s/ Chris Kennedy
Chris, doesn’t requesting subpoenas seeking the GPS records of private citizens who may (or may not) have attended yoga classes seem a little like overreach to you? Or perhaps a waste of scarce public resources?
Sure seems petty and vindictive to me.
I can understand your concerns about possible overreach and perhaps you are right in this case. It appears the sponsors of this business are fighting this in Court so the City will have to prove the need for this sort of information. That’s what Courts are for. Since this fight has been going on for awhile it may be that past experience with the organizers of this activity has shown a need for this information. Again, up to a Court. At a minimum it does show that the City is serious about stopping this. I feel a special affinity for the Cliffs so am glad to see the City going after this so vigorously.
/s/ Chris Kennedy
One thing I want to add then I promise I will drop this: I hardly think I am alone in having a special affinity for the Cliffs, and find the City’s efforts to protect this public park an entirely proper expenditure of public resources.
/s/ Chris
Chris,
Letting people escape and breathe the ocean air for 40 minutes on a Saturday morning at 8am really bothers you?
They are quiet and clean. Very respectful people that share your same affinity for the cliffs. Let them be. The city is just pissed because they can’t collect $ to build more parking meters.
Hi JM – i’m going to step in and answer this one as I think you’re taking it to a ridiculous extreme. At no point did Chris or anyone say that they don’t think people should be going outside getting air, breathing, etc. Nice try though. What Chris was saying, and what I happen to agree with is that allowing this to happen on public property is wrong on so many levels. This Hubbard guy and side kick are running a business on public property and even if there is not one shred of truth to to his fees for said “classes” he should not be occupying that much space, ruining the view and access for ALL tax-paying folks. Keep in mind, I love yoga. Been doing it for years, but this is when individuals, personal money, making business, and it has no place on public property. As far as the city getting all the personal information of the attendees, I think that may be a bit of overreach, but that’s not the comment you made so I shan’t comment on that further.
The thing is that everyone keeps missing is that its a public park meaning for all citizens, not just the ones who lay on the beach or swim. but for people who want to gather and have parties, to the people who want to gather and do yoga together, its a public beach. IF you want to protect the beach from people make it private. Otherwise the whole point of a public space is to gather, and observe your rights how you feel. You may just want to lay in the sun, others might want to play a sport, or swim, others might want to BBQ and Feast. Some people want to teach others, and some people want to be taught (outside of a classroom environment.) We shouldn’t be telling the public how they use the public space. That gets into authoritarian territory.
Exactly! It’s a public beach/ park / cliffs open to all citizens, NOT JUST FOR THOSE who pay, dude! That’s what you’re missing.
Plus, quit flooding the zone and don’t be so insulting to other commenters, or you’ll be asked to quit this space — which is not public but is for the public.
I would call it retaliation. because the courts ordered the city to leave the yoga people alone, and have said that the yoga classes donations or not are protected speech, and donations itself is also protected speech. The deputy city attorney involved is as unethical as they come too. He lied in court 3 times in a row when the judge asked him if the yoga people ever applied for a permit. 3 times the judge asked if they tried, 3 times the deputy city attorney said no, then the judge pulls out the smoking gun, an application filed, and stamped “denied.” The judge didn’t like how the attorney responded and the attorney was flabbergasted. The judge came down hard on the city that day. The city attorney said the yoga people caused safety issues, and the judge said, “where is your evidence.” The city had nothing.
The city makes claims of safety and welfare but their own evidence invalidates their claims. Either way, I am almost certain going after the data of citizens attending these public yoga classes is not going to fair well for the city attorney, and this might trigger a legal audit by the Bar association… I really hope it does because this man, shouldn’t be working for the city.
As I have only seen $10 and $20 bills dropped into the jar. No checks, no credit cards, although I have not conducted a scientific observation. Under the radar. On the other hand, I read this morning in the U-T that North County is permitting Goat Yoga classes. These yoga people are inventive!
Many take Venmo….
People exploiting public property by doing yoga? I think you just want everywhere to be only for you and people like you. Grow up.
The real question is “Should a business be allowed to engage in for profit activities on public parkland, without paying some compensation to the public for the use of the public property”? These yoga instructors are clearly running a for profit enterprise. Why don’t you ask a yoga practitioner who has a brick and mortar studio and has to pay all the costs associated with running a small business how they feel about these “free range” yoga folks.
PUBLIC PARK, is OPEN to ALL PUBLIC!!!
If this is a free assembly of people and not a business, what is the issue? I frequent Sunset Cliffs Park, and I’ve always considered the yogis a coloful part of the scenery.
Did you read it? There is money exchanged for services rendered. Also, nobody ever mentions it, but a lot of true yoga is breathing and how can you do that along with dozens of others who all are being instructed via orders loudly broadcast?
I’m with Chris and the City on this one. No commercial activity in our parks without a permit! Period. This yoga grifter is now costing taxpayers money. The public lecture excuse is laughable and Bryan Pease is a grifter too. Get a permit if you want to hold a large gathering in a public space. End of story.
Maybe they can hold their yoga classes on all the empty bike lanes
Hilarious!
Seems like the yoga peeps are in some sort of power trip…
Must be stressful…
And expensive to sue the city…
So un-yoga-ish.
Can you imagine it, you are just doing what you believe is a protected right, even won a court case that proves this 8 years before. And the city sends park rangers to treat you like a common criminal, not just to the beach but also to your home while you are streaming on youtube, because you are live streaming on youtube. They just keep writting tickets. Then you go to court and the judge puts orders in for them to stop, and they just keep writting tickets after… You could just give up, and turn the other cheek, but then the city will do it to another group out expressing their first amendment rights. Or you could step up and sue and prove in court that what you are doing is protected speech. Which will eventually create change not just for yourself but for other people.
Sometimes doing the right thing is hard.
I stood up for the rights of another and I got ran through it by the city of san diego, for calling a ranger a bully. After 3 years of legal battles the city settled, and I created 3 different court presidents in California, that said disorderly conduct as written was unconstitutional, the way it was applied in my case was a violation of my rights and the city was liable for damages, and I was able to get a 130 year old archaic city ordinance repealed.
It was pure stressful hell and the opposite of the way I like to live, but the city had been violating rights of people using this law for a very long time.
What is interesting is that I have a stack of testimony from video depositions that show a deeper systemic issue with the park rangers office and its leadership. One of the biggest issues this has pointed out is that the park rangers do not have any formal complaint forms, and they take complaints orally to quell any paper trail and audits against any rangers. And the investigations often amount to leadership talking with supervisors and always ruling the complaints unfounded. Even more so to regulars who complain often.
There are other problems my case has pointed out. Such as a tribunal in an internal investigation themselves, or the ranger being investigated falsified a report to get the ranger off the hook over a formal complaint.
Another issue that this case I was in pointed out is that the park rangers knew that 56.27 was a vague piece of code and could cause legal problems but continued to use it anyway.
Another issue that this case pointed out is that when the courts said the law was unconstitutional the chief ranger refused to educate or update his employees because “he disagreed with the court rulings.”
IT also shows that the park rangers used the law to try and blacklist me from the park so I wouldn’t be able to film them and criticize them for violating rights. They were retaliating for my criticism…
I am working on organizing it all to tell the full story, and plan to do a city council meeting soon to discuss these issues. (I need a few people to go with me to cede me time so I can get the full story out there.) I am also going to make a documentary about this whole situation, because this story needs to be told…
Anyways the point of this is, yes it is stressful to sue a city, but sometimes people must go through hell to stand up for their rights and the rights of others, and its usually because those people are forced to.
So you guys talking about the yoga stuff should actually look at the court documents and case, rather than listen to the city and the deputy city attorney.
1 these people running the city don’t care about state or federal laws, especially the rangers.
All they care about is local municipal code.
2 This city attorney, lied to a judge and said the yoga people never applied for a permit, the judge pulled out their application after getting the same story 3 times from the city attorney. The judge said these folks tried and were denied. In that same court the judges said, “the yoga ban is unconstitutional. Regardless the rangers still cited the yoga people”
3 Yoga itself is a form of protected speech, gathering in a park itself is a form of protected speech, and even if they had a price on it, protected speech that is monetized is itself protected. Here is a link to back up this statement.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-9th-circuit/1300114.html
4 The ordinance that makes yoga illegal in parks, is actually an administrative citation, and is a civil offence, has 6 lawsuits against it. Under the lawsuits, it violates state laws and rights, federal laws and rights, contradicts state law sb946, is unconstitutionally vague, and there is an issue with the way it is enforced. In all of these cases the state and federal judges are ruling in the favor of the plaintiffs. Local courts though are always siding with the city which points out a systemic flaw in the local court system.
5 The city has been paying out a lot of massive lawsuits and settlements over these kinds of things, I am one of those people who have been paid out. In the depositions from my lawsuit there is a lot of issues that are highlighted with testimony from Chief Ranger Ruiz.
(1) They take oral complaints only, which reduces paper trails for audits. (2) they find complaints made from regulars to be unfounded because it comes from regulars.
(3) They ignore judge orders because they disagree with their opinions, and refuse to inform other members of the ranger staff when a judge said 56.27 was unconstitutional and the way it was applied was a violation of my rights. (4) Shows that either a ranger or the fact finding investigation tribunal, falsified a report. (5) shows rangers have only had detainment and citation powers since 2020. (6) shows that rangers have very little training concerning the first amendment and other constitutional protections. (7)shows rangers are not law enforcement and can’t physically detain someone, yet also shows how the rangers “stack charges” to trap citizens in legal loopholes. (8) shows the rangers actually do understand first amendment protected speech, but also shows they will rationalize criminalizing protected speech. (9) there is a plethora of testimony that shows credibility issues in the rangers office. Rangers contradict themselves in their testimony.
(10) the whole depositions transcription files & videos show systemic issues with transparency, accountability, and how the rangers office sweeps complaints under the rug to never be seen again.
I want to address city council about this, but I have tried working with them a few times only to be pushed to work with the rangers office who the head of rangers is less than honorable about working with people who aren’t his rangers.
Be careful believing what the city says or does concerning these issues. The level of corruption in all of this runs deep.
Wait… Didn’t SCOTUS rule that Yoga is free speech, and unlimited amounts of Yoga with no accountability can control our parks and beaches? Yogazens United 2010.
I agree with the City on this as a Yogi, surfer and frequent parks user. You are free to practice yoga wherever and whenever you want. The paid classes create access challanges for everyone else. Go to a proper studio or practice on your own if you really want to be somewhere on a City park.
No business on our park land: Period!
I notice all the comments are like the city employee’s ignore the appeals court orders, “that details yoga, classes, donation or not, is protected speech and a ban on it is unconstitutional.
Ignoring the courts, court precedence, court orders, and court legal procedure is exactly why the city is constantly paying out in these high paying lawsuits and settlements.
The giant yoga classes on the Cliffs make me not want to go down there. It ruins the vibe for me. I don’t care when I see individuals or 2-3 people stretching or doing yoga on the Cliffs. The Cliffs used to be calm, quiet, reflective space. Now it’s a social media/gathering Sh*t show.
I don’t agree with most of what the City does but I’m all for them fighting this.
And have you seen how trampled the ground is where they hold these classes? It’s not good for the Cliffs.
How often are you there? how often are they there? you make it sound like its an all day everyday thing. Let me guess you also do not like tourists taking up the beach during the summer.
You may not like it, but gathering in public space is protected by the first amendment, teaching a class in public space is protected by the first amendment, and yes getting donations or even charging for said activity is protected by the first amendment. IT sounds to me what it is that you want is a private beach.
A yoga instructor, a cyclist, and a NIMBY all go to Sunset Cliffs at golden hour.
The yoga instructor sets up too close to the edge mid-warrior pose, and the bluff gives out beneath her.
The cyclist swerves to avoid her, hits the soft sandstone, and goes right over with her.
The NIMBY rushes to the edge to film evidence for his erosion lawsuit, leans out too far, and joins them both on the way down.
The seagulls, at least, finally got the neighborhood to themselves.
Why is the cyclist not in the bike lane? My wittyness I hope negates my excessive posting from all the articles with 0 replies or troll support.
The cyclist is not in the bike lane because the city wanted those lanes to be more parking spots for their paid meters lol
I tuned in to see what 30 yoga posts were about. Too funny. I can see the city on the wrong side of this again, with a broken record of litigation payouts, financed by taxpayers, paying more from increased deductibles. A major league city run by rookies moved by special interests.
https://www.sandiegoville.com/2026/06/namasteve-files-third-lawsuit-against.html
I would like to leave you all with one final piece of knowledge then I will bow out of this conversation.
This is the video of the preliminary injunction hearing in Sacramento last year.
In this video the judges try explaining to the city attorney, why yoga and other public assebblies where people teach are protected speech, and the city attorney just does not get it and continually argues with the judges. Further more at time stamp 34″17 One of the judges asked the city attorney, “did the yoga people apply for a permit, and the city attorney lied 3 times and said no, they did not. The judge then pulls out the application with the city denial stamp across it with a date. The judgest were not impressed with the city attorney or his arguments, which is why they remanded this case back to city court with orders to grant preliminary injunction. Shortly after this, the city sent rangers to cite the yoga people more which was a defiance of court orders.