An Illinois state judge has issued a restraining order barring schools from enforcing mask mandates, however the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) issued a statement that their masking policies will not change. Can any legal types explain what legal basis CPS might have to seemingly defy the court’s order? Thanks.
Earlier on Friday, Grischow denied class certification in those cases. Plaintiffs seek class certification in cases where they want others not named in the filing, but in a similar position, to access the same cause of action. So while Grischow granted the temporary restraining order, the order will only apply to school staff and students who were part of the original filing, not other staff and students.
"The judge’s decision covers districts across the state but not Chicago Public Schools.
According to the ruling, collectively-bargained agreements remain enforceable, like the one between CPS and the Chicago Teachers Union.
“…We expect the mayor and CPS to act responsibly and uphold our agreement to require masks — providing KN95 masks for every adult and child in our schools,” CTU said in a statement. “This is what the overwhelming majority of Chicago parents and families support.”
So the answer to the thread title appears to be “No”.
Looking at the beginning and ending of the ruling, it appears to just be against Pritzker (state government) and one school district.
Footnote 39
Although this Court denied Plaintiffs’ request for Class Certification in Case No: 2021-CH-500002, this Court has declared IDPH’s Emergency Rules void. Any non-named Plaintiffs and School Districts throughout this State may govern themselves accordingly.
Footnote 40
Although this Court denied Plaintiffs’ request for Class Certification in Case No: 2021-CH-500007, this Court has declared IDPH and ISBE’s Emergency Rules void. Thus, non-named Plaintiffs and School Districts throughout this State may govern themselves accordingly.
Makes it sound like the TRO is against state level action.
No, that’s what the “et al” means in the ruling. There were something like 140 school districts involved. The question, then, is whether or not CPS was one of the 140. As they largest in the state, it’s hard to imagine that someone didn’t file against them, as well.
Fair enough. I’m still looking through the ruling and not finding anything so far that prevents a school district from enacting its own mask restrictions. I’m still reading though.
Illinois has over 1,000 school districts, so it’s not terribly hard to imagine that a ruling that affects less than 1/7th of the districts would leave out a single specific one…
It looks like the order overturns the statewide school mask mandate, but schools can mandate masks if they want to:
“She’s saying that what the governor and his agencies are doing is invalid,” DeVore said. “So if school districts want to do their own thing, do their own thing.”
From here:
So, if that’s right, any school districts can mandate masks if they want to. However, the governor cannot force all schools to impose mask mandates (so far – there is an appeal, of course). That seems perfectly clear to me, and CPS isn’t ignoring anything.
That’s my understanding as well. The judges decision is about the state mandate, not about prohibiting individual districts from making their own rules.
A bipartisan legislative committee has voted against extending the school mask mandate, and the Appeals Court has dismissed the Governor’s appeal of the Circuit Court’s order. According to this, mandates by individual school districts such as CPS can* still be challenged in court.
I’ll be curious to see how quickly my kids ditch the masks when they’re allowed to. They oddly seem to like wearing their masks. Even when I’ve taken them places where mask wearing was not required, and I wasn’t wearing a mask, they refused to go inside without putting on a mask. I think they’ll just have to get used to others not wearing them. I’m fine with them dropping the mandate, but I’m not against keeping it going for a while longer, either, to let the Omicron dust settle and re-evaluate where we’re at.