Illinois court tosses Pritzker's mask mandate appeal, leaving it up to districts

The Fourth District Appellate Court ruled early Friday that Illinois' indoor mask requirement in schools has expired and the appeal made by the Illinois attorney general against a temporary restraining order issued Feb. 4 barring schools from enforcing it was dismissed.

In allowing the TRO to remain in place against more than 140 school districts, the court said in a 24-page ruling, school district officials can decide how to address indoor masking requirements.

The ruling comes in light of a legislative committee Tuesday not renewing the mask mandate requested by the Illinois Department of Public Health.

See also: Assistant school superintendent from Indiana lands top position with Ball-Chatham district

A spokeswoman for Gov. JB Pritzker said the governor was "disappointed" with the decision and said he planned to appeal.

The TRO granted by 7th Judicial Circuit Judge Raylene Grischow in Sangamon County court covered separate lawsuits, but it did declare the emergency rules implemented by IDPH and the Illinois State Board of Education on Sept. 17 regarding mask mandates for students and teachers "void" and that school districts may "govern themselves accordingly."

The lawsuit against the 146 school districts was originally filed in Macoupin County in October. Area school districts named in the lawsuit were Ball-Chatham, Carrollton, Mount Pulaski, Petersburg PORTA, Jacksonville, North Mac, Carlinville and Staunton.

The three-judge panel wrote that the expiration of the emergency rules rendered the appeal "moot."

Justice John Turner wrote the order. Justices Thomas Harris and Lisa Holder White concurred in most parts.

The Fourth District Appellate Court is one of five districts of the Illinois Appellate Court. It is composed of seven judges and encompasses 31 counties across a band of the state. The court meets in Springfield.

Don Craven, a Springfield attorney and president of the Illinois Press Association, said he understood why the appellate court reached its decision.

"They read the result of JCAR's action as the end of those emergency rules," Craven said, "and if they are no more, the court doesn't need to decide if they were valid or not."

On Tuesday, the General Assembly's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules rejected an emergency rule proposed by IDPH which would have outlined the requirements for schools to "exclude" certain students based on their exposure to COVID-19 as well as require masks for students and teachers. 

The bicameral committee, made up of lawmakers from both parties, rejected the rule unanimously.

The court also disposed of Pritzker's contention that his executive orders, despite the JCAR ruling, were still in effect.

Administration spokesperson Jordan Abudayyeh said the governor was "concerned for the health of those in schools–particularly vulnerable children and adults–and the ability to continue in-person learning. The administration is working with (Attorney General Kwame Raoul) to request an expedited review of this decision from the (Illinois) Supreme Court."

Abudayyeh said the governor "was encouraged that the court made it clear that school districts can continue to keep their own mitigations in place."

Craven said the state could file a petition for leave of appeal asking the Illinois Supreme Court to take the case or it could file a motion for supervisory order. That, Craven said, would essentially be asking the Supreme Court to tell the appellate court to decide the case and would be on a faster track.

The appellate court's decision noted that the TRO "in no way restrains school districts from acting independently from the executive orders or the IDPH in creating provisions addressing COVID-19. Thus, it does not appear the school districts are temporarily restrained from acting by the court’s TRO."

Earlier: Mask mandate for Illinois schools rejected by state legislative oversight committee

Greenville-based attorney Thomas DeVore, the plaintiff in the case, said those executive orders were trying to get around the law of the court and due process.

"What that says right there is what I've been saying for months, that (Pritzker's) executive orders are just fearmongering," DeVore said. "They're hollow policies and without any lawful rule and some mechanism, you can't do anything with them. It's just a piece of paper."

Since the TRO was issued, most local and area school districts, including Springfield District 186, Ball-Chatham and Rochester, have "encouraged" or recommended wearing of masks.

Around the state, it set off widely varying reactions by school districts, some of whom called off classes in the wake of the confusion. In some locales, there were protests at school board meetings.

Rochester Superintendent Dan Cox said he communicated with parents and guardians after the TRO was announced. On Monday, Rochester's board of education met at a special meeting to pass a layered mitigation plan.

That includes going forward with a "mask recommended" policy.

"Really, the sole purpose of the plan is to provide stability for our schools so we don't get caught in this flipping back and forth between legal cases because those are out of our control and we wanted to focus on what we could control," Cox said. "Our primary goal is to educate our kids and do that in a safe environment and that's something we've been doing, and we take very seriously."

Cox said he didn't see any problems in schools after the TRO basically made mask wearing unenforceable.

"We had both students and adults wearing masks and there were those who chose not to wear masks," Cox said. "In terms of the feedback we got, it was one of the best weeks of school we had in a long time. It was a regular school day inside. I know there was a lot of discussion going on outside of the school walls."

More: Illinois mask mandate for most indoor settings will be lifted by the end of the month

While it has been a tumultuous past few weeks for schools, Illinois Education Association president Kathi Griffin, in a statement Friday, said she at least appreciated the clarity the decision brought forth.

“Students crave consistency, but Judge Grischow’s Feb. 4 decision to enter a TRO in the case sent schools into chaos," Griffin noted. “A bright spot in the decision clarifies for which parties the TRO applies.  The appellate court affirmatively stated that ‘the language of the TRO in no way restrains school districts from acting independently from the executive orders or the IDPH in creating provisions addressing COVID-19.’"

Pritzker announced on Feb. 9 a plan to roll back indoor mask requirements by the end of the month. 

That wouldn't affect schools or congregate settings like hospitals and long-term care facilities. Pritzker added it didn't stop businesses or local governments from creating and enforcing mask requirements. 

Craven said schools are different because most younger students are unvaccinated or can't be vaccinated age-wise and movement is different in schools versus workplaces.

"There are factual bases for the distinction," Craven said.

This story will be updated.

Contact Steven Spearie: 217-622-1788, sspearie@sj-r.com, twitter.com/@StevenSpearie.