Deplorable:
A group of parents of students with disabilities lack legal standing to challenge a state law prohibiting mask mandates at public schools, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.
In a ruling written by Judge Ralph Erickson, the three-judge panel found that the parents did not show they had been or were likely to be injured by the state law. The ruling reversed a previous court injunction on the law and allowed it to take effect.
The ruling is the latest decision in a three-year court battle over a 2021 law signed by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds. The law prohibits schools, cities and counties from requiring masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Reynolds applauded the ruling in a statement on Tuesday and defended the decision to ban school mask mandates.
“While children were the least vulnerable, they paid the highest price for COVID lockdowns and mandates, but Iowa was a different story,” she said. “Iowa was the first state to get students back in the classroom and we prohibited mask mandates in schools, trusting parents to decide what was best for their children. Elected leaders should always trust the people they serve, and I promise I would do it again.”
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said in a statement that the ruling was a win for parents' rights to make choices for their children.
“Freedom wins in today’s court ruling to uphold Iowa’s law banning mask mandates in schools," Bird said. "Parents have the right to choose what healthcare decisions are best for their kids."
The lawsuit was brought by the Arc of Iowa, an organization that works with people with disabilities. Doug Cunningham, the group’s executive director, said that the threat of COVID-19 has substantially subsided since the lawsuit was filed. Still, he said the decision to accommodate students’ health and safety should be left up to local school districts and area education agencies.
“The public schools of Iowa have a long history of educating those students, including people with disabilities,” he said. “And they really don’t need government to step in and tell them how to do that.”
Cunningham said he does not expect the organization will appeal the decision further.
Schools in Iowa have largely dropped mask mandates as the prevalence of COVID-19 has gone down. Cunningham said he was not aware of any students with disabilities in the state that currently were requesting a mask mandate as part of their accommodations.
The law was temporarily halted that month, when a district court judge ruled that students with pre-existing medical conditions face an increased risk of severe illness or death without the widespread use of masks in school to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
That injunction was partially overturned by an appeals court in 2022, but litigation was allowed to continue at the district court level. At the time, the appeals court noted that the circumstances around COVID-19 prevalence and vaccine availability had changed since the lawsuit was lodged.
District court Judge Robert Pratt ruled in November of 2022 that schools can impose mask mandates, in some cases, to comply with federal law.
But in its decision Tuesday, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dissolved that order and sent instructions to the district court to dismiss the lawsuit.
Central to the lawsuit was the claim from parents that they or their children faced potential injuries from the prohibition on mask requirements.
Pointing to existing precedent, the appeals court said a person must suffer an injury that is traceable to the challenged law, and is likely to be redressed by a court decision. The court said the anticipated risk of contracting COVID-19 was too speculative to establish an injury.
“Here, because Plaintiffs have only alleged the potential risk of severe illness should they contract COVID-19 at school, the risk of harm is too speculative to satisfy the injury in fact element,” Erickson wrote.
nonpareilonline.com
A group of parents of students with disabilities lack legal standing to challenge a state law prohibiting mask mandates at public schools, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.
In a ruling written by Judge Ralph Erickson, the three-judge panel found that the parents did not show they had been or were likely to be injured by the state law. The ruling reversed a previous court injunction on the law and allowed it to take effect.
The ruling is the latest decision in a three-year court battle over a 2021 law signed by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds. The law prohibits schools, cities and counties from requiring masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Reynolds applauded the ruling in a statement on Tuesday and defended the decision to ban school mask mandates.
“While children were the least vulnerable, they paid the highest price for COVID lockdowns and mandates, but Iowa was a different story,” she said. “Iowa was the first state to get students back in the classroom and we prohibited mask mandates in schools, trusting parents to decide what was best for their children. Elected leaders should always trust the people they serve, and I promise I would do it again.”
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said in a statement that the ruling was a win for parents' rights to make choices for their children.
“Freedom wins in today’s court ruling to uphold Iowa’s law banning mask mandates in schools," Bird said. "Parents have the right to choose what healthcare decisions are best for their kids."
The lawsuit was brought by the Arc of Iowa, an organization that works with people with disabilities. Doug Cunningham, the group’s executive director, said that the threat of COVID-19 has substantially subsided since the lawsuit was filed. Still, he said the decision to accommodate students’ health and safety should be left up to local school districts and area education agencies.
“The public schools of Iowa have a long history of educating those students, including people with disabilities,” he said. “And they really don’t need government to step in and tell them how to do that.”
Cunningham said he does not expect the organization will appeal the decision further.
Schools in Iowa have largely dropped mask mandates as the prevalence of COVID-19 has gone down. Cunningham said he was not aware of any students with disabilities in the state that currently were requesting a mask mandate as part of their accommodations.
Appeals court overturns district court decision
In September 2021, the Arc of Iowa, along with 11 parents of students with disabilities, sued Reynolds and school districts, alleging the law infringed on the rights of students with disabilities.The law was temporarily halted that month, when a district court judge ruled that students with pre-existing medical conditions face an increased risk of severe illness or death without the widespread use of masks in school to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
That injunction was partially overturned by an appeals court in 2022, but litigation was allowed to continue at the district court level. At the time, the appeals court noted that the circumstances around COVID-19 prevalence and vaccine availability had changed since the lawsuit was lodged.
District court Judge Robert Pratt ruled in November of 2022 that schools can impose mask mandates, in some cases, to comply with federal law.
But in its decision Tuesday, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dissolved that order and sent instructions to the district court to dismiss the lawsuit.
Central to the lawsuit was the claim from parents that they or their children faced potential injuries from the prohibition on mask requirements.
Pointing to existing precedent, the appeals court said a person must suffer an injury that is traceable to the challenged law, and is likely to be redressed by a court decision. The court said the anticipated risk of contracting COVID-19 was too speculative to establish an injury.
“Here, because Plaintiffs have only alleged the potential risk of severe illness should they contract COVID-19 at school, the risk of harm is too speculative to satisfy the injury in fact element,” Erickson wrote.
Federal appeals court upholds Iowa law banning school mask mandates
The law was challenged by a group of parents of students with disabilities who alleged it violated federal disability protections.
