Greenville attorney Tom DeVore, who represents the Illinois students and parents suing Gov. J.B. Pritzker over his COVID-19 mandates for schools, responded to the Fourth District Appellate Court ruling saying Pritzker is “out of the picture.”
In a Facebook Live video shared by DeVore on Feb. 18, he said the plaintiffs are “really just dealing with the school districts now,” after the appellate court released its Feb. 17 Rule 23 decision.
DeVore, who also founded the American Freedom Society, addressed the court’s statement that school districts have independent authority.
Justice John W. Turner wrote in the appellate decision, “We note the language of the TRO in no way restrains school districts from acting independently from the executive orders or the IDPH (Illinois Department of Public Health) in creating provisions addressing COVID-19. Thus, it does not appear the school districts are temporarily restrained from acting by the court’s TRO.”
DeVore said that while a school district’s independent authority is “absolutely true,” that independence does not give them the authority to violate the due process rights of students and staff.
He said that Sangamon County Judge Raylene Grischow’s order granting a temporary restraining order on COVID-19 mandates in schools holds that school districts “can’t just do whatever they want.”
Illinois Education Association President Kathi Griffin said Grischow’s order “sent schools into chaos,” but called the appellate court’s remarks on school districts’ independent authority “a bright spot in the decision.”
Grischow’s Feb. 4 order, which was upheld when the appellate court dismissed Pritzker's appeal as moot, states that the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) Act gives individuals the right to object to “modified quarantine” procedures and affords them due process of law in those instances. She specified that “at no time” did the amendments to the IDHP Act in response to Ebola in 2014 “take away a person’s due process rights.”
Grischow agreed that schools have independent authority provided by the Illinois School Code, but said that “the legislature specified that school districts still had to coordinate with IDPH on health related issues,” and the IDPH is bound by due process.
DeVore said that if Pritzker and IDPH must follow due process, so do the school districts.
He added that because Grischow signed a contempt of court order against Chicago Public Schools for refusing to lift mask mandates, she therefore did not intend for school districts to have unlimited authority.
He said he will continue to challenge school districts that maintain mask requirements.
“Those issues now are just as important as they ever were,” he said.
“You know what I like about it?” he added. “[Grischow] finds that J.B. Pritzker was engaging in some pretty inappropriate conduct, that his executive orders 24 and 25 were issued for the purpose of violating your due process rights. That’s a pretty significant finding on the part of the court. Finding that the executive officer intentionally engaged in violating your due process rights.”
DeVore also addressed how the appellate court responded to an inquiry on how the appeal is affected by the Feb. 15 suspension by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR). He said Pritzker argued that schools still had to require masks in accordance with his Emergency Order 24 despite JCAR’s decision.
“You know what the appellate court said? They disposed of that in two words, ‘We disagree,’” DeVore said.
In the appellate decision, Turner wrote, “[T]he State defendants in essence argue the now expired emergency rule changes were not and are not necessary to effectuate EO-24’s new definition of modified quarantine. We disagree.”
Turner added that the executive order was issued after other courts found that “masking and exclusion of students from school were still considered to be a form of quarantine warranting protections under section 2 of the Department of Public Health Act.”
“His executive order was trying to get around the law,” DeVore said.
“His executive orders are just fear mongering,” he added. “They’re hollow policies. Without any lawful rule or some mechanism, you can’t do anything with them. It’s just a piece of paper. That’s what the appellate court said.”
Speak For Students co-founder Ryan Cunningham celebrated the appellate court’s decision.
“This movement started with everyday parents who first tried to engage their local school boards before taking legal action,” he stated. “Today is a win for the parents and shows the little man can stand up to government overreach.”
Speak For Students applauded parents and community members for making their voices heard at local school board meetings and advocating for mask-optional resolutions from their local County Boards of Health.
“You were labeled a ‘domestic terrorist’ for making your voice heard,” read a Feb. 18 Facebook post. “You retained counsel and legally fought the battle in the courtroom, and you WON! Today we celebrate. Tomorrow we move forward with reforming our educational system.”
DeVore said he plans to address the “bus issue” next.
“I hate to say it, but I don’t know what else to do to get these school districts to take these masks off these babies and leave them alone,” he said.
School districts have maintained mask requirements on buses, saying they are a form of public transportation and under federal mask mandates.
However, according to the American Freedom Society, school bus service is not defined as public transportation in U.S. Code Chapter 53.
During his Feb. 18 response to the appellate court ruling, DeVore also said he is planning an event in Springfield on Feb. 28, which is the same day Pritzker previously announced that mask mandates would be lifted for the general public. DeVore said he has “big announcement” plans for that day and will have students sharing their experiences over the last two years.
Illinois Education Association President Kathi Griffin’s full statement:
“We appreciate the clarity brought forth in the Fourth District Appellate Court’s decision last night dismissing defendants’ appeal of the temporary restraining order (TRO) finding that the expiration and non-renewal of Illinois Department of Public Health and Illinois State Board of Education emergency orders regulating COVID mitigations in schools made their arguments moot. There has been much confusion over what Circuit Court Judge Raylene Grischow’s original ruling even meant. It appeared to apply only to those districts named in the original court cases, which would be about 150. But according to school administrators, there are at least 500 mask-recommended districts now in Illinois.
"Students crave consistency. But, Judge Grischow’s Feb. 4 decision to enter a TRO in the case sent schools into chaos.
“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.’
“These past few weeks have been tumultuous in schools around the state. They have been described by some as the worst time in our teachers’ and education employees’ careers. They’re getting angry emails, having to comfort scared students and are working to help calm other students who are dealing with the trauma that this pandemic has caused. Schools are supposed to be students’ safe haven. That’s not what we’ve been seeing at many of our schools recently. We know school board meetings have been canceled and schools have shut down because of threats and protests. This has to stop.
“Mitigation efforts are not political. They are put in place to keep students and school staff from getting sick, or from bringing home COVID-19 to loved ones who may be susceptible.
“As the weather gets warmer and as hospitalizations continue to decline, we are hopeful that school districts will adhere to their duty to bargain in good faith with local associations over health and safety issues, including mitigation efforts, and remind all that any existing collective bargaining agreements or memoranda of understanding around these issues remain intact.
“We need people to remember we are all in this together – parents, community members, educators and our students. There is a light at the end of this long, dark tunnel. We need to come together to find thoughtful solutions to bring some calm back to our schools, which will provide a better environment for our teachers and staff to provide students the important learning and emotional support that they need.”