Do riot and COVID victims have an equal protection case against Democrat governments?

In Democrat-run war zones like Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis and the like, the mobs were left free to take over areas, and police were ordered to stand down and let it happen, even giving the mobs a police precinct.  Those Democrats ostensibly in control of these places failed to exercise the most important function of government: to protect the citizens.  There may be a remedy.

In the process of the madness, many good people had their life's work and dreams crushed.  Their businesses were looted, robbed, and sometimes burned, as the cities did nothing.  Other businesses were destroyed simply because no one dared to patronize them due to the danger of going out of their homes or entering areas where police protection ceased to exist.  Workers at these businesses lost their jobs.  Many or most will never recover, either financially or emotionally.

In many states, businesses were ordered to close due to COVID.  When allowed to open, they were required to essentially halve their patrons and spend funds on infrastructure to assure social distancing, sometimes only to be told to close again.  Consequently, employment was also devastated.  Many or most of these, too, will never recover.

Who pays for this carnage?  Our Constitution, and many state constitutions, provide for equal protection under the law.  Hopefully, it is just a matter of time before someone, either individually or as a class, files suit against these cities and states for denial of equal protection.

In the cities and states in the physical war zones, the basis is obvious.  There was a failure to protect the rights of the economic victims while completely surrendering to the mobs.  Those in charge will say they have to protect the peaceful right to protest, but the video evidence is overwhelming that it wasn't peaceful protests that caused the damage; it was riots.  What about an honest businessman's right to operate his business without not only fear of criminal mayhem, but actual criminal mayhem?

Then we have the lockdown victims in the economic war zones.  Without getting to the question of valid authority or not to order lockdowns, one thing is clear.  The "rules" or laws were not applied equally and still aren't in too many places.  The very same places that have prevented or restricted business activity in the name of COVID and social distancing have done just the opposite with the protesters and rioters.  With the latter, the so-called Democrat leaders are just fine with allowing protesters to run amok with impunity as regards social distancing "rules."  Why is this unruly and destructive group afforded unequal treatment, better than the business-owners who actually pay taxes, provide employment, and support the cities?

That will be an excellent question for a jury when considering the awarding of damages against those who blatantly and intentionally failed to provide equal protection under the laws to these businesses.  Substantial punitive damages would appear to be in order to deter such behavior in the future.  To avoid local politics, bring the cases in the federal courts as a federal question.

And then there are the citizens who were told they couldn't attend weddings or funerals or even have groups of people over for a cookout.  They, too, were treated unequally compared to the protestors who were allowed to do what they wanted where they wanted.  Their actual damages may be more difficult to quantify, but they are there nonetheless.