ACPS, APS, et al sue over EO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The governor's EO seems so tone deaf to issue in the midst of omicron. Parents here are holding their breath that APS has enough staff to stay open. One of my kids hasn't had several teachers back in yet in 2022, with four of five of her teachers out on Friday alone. Can't we please table this discussion until March? I

Yes. He’s a dick to push it in the middle of a surge. This will only hurt our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The governor's EO seems so tone deaf to issue in the midst of omicron. Parents here are holding their breath that APS has enough staff to stay open. One of my kids hasn't had several teachers back in yet in 2022, with four of five of her teachers out on Friday alone. Can't we please table this discussion until March? I

Yes. He’s a dick to push it in the middle of a surge. This will only hurt our kids.

I'm not sure he's a dick for pushing it in the middle of a surge, more like stupid. It's just terrible strategy. If he had just waited a few weeks this had a chance of being less political, and he'd probably get way less pushback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At issue is whether governor can, through executive order, without legislative action by the Virginia General Assembly, reverse a lawfully-adopted statute. In this case, Senate Bill 1303, adopted with the goal of returning students to safe in-person instruction five days a week in March 2021 and still legally in effect, provides that local school boards should follow The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) health and safety requirements.

I'm thinking no, he cannot do that.

ACPS press release here, but no link to the Complaint yet, unfortunately: https://www.acps.k12.va.us/site/default.aspx?PageType=3&DomainID=1527&ModuleInstanceID=11396&ViewID=6446EE88-D30C-497E-9316-3F8874B3E108&RenderLoc=0&FlexDataID=15513&PageID=3707

I suspect there will be parent choice by Valentines Day no matter what happens with the EO. If the schools succeed, the legislature will take action, and they may do so in any event.. Look at who passed SB 1303, which will be the same folks that change it to create the "off ramp". https://www.dunnavantdelivers.com/post/press-release-statement-of-senator-dunnavant-on-sb1303?fbclid=IwAR3O9FICEtrmIrpp475K4WoIOYenKoYrAcROjrwR4q39-_ywF1rqLnnwzGc

It’s not just SB 1303. The lawsuit cites constitutional authority for the school boards to impose these safety measures. They could do so even if there wasn’t an SB 1303.

[Anonymous]

Here's the Complaint

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21185299/nova-v-youngkin-complaint-for-declaratory-and-injunctive-relief.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2uFhry7E6IRySQeq4YpLNJiQ29c20eElD2cRqXpXsd98v-T-hLO6s2hE0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's the Complaint

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21185299/nova-v-youngkin-complaint-for-declaratory-and-injunctive-relief.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2uFhry7E6IRySQeq4YpLNJiQ29c20eElD2cRqXpXsd98v-T-hLO6s2hE0

Thanks for sharing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just glad that any enforcement of his nonsense EO will take time, even if it stands. And hopefully we will be in a better covid place in the spring.

This depends on if the school boards get a preliminary injunction to enjoin the EO. Otherwise the governor’s office could take action to enforce the EO and parents could sue any school district that tries to continue enforcing a mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's the Complaint

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21185299/nova-v-youngkin-complaint-for-declaratory-and-injunctive-relief.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2uFhry7E6IRySQeq4YpLNJiQ29c20eElD2cRqXpXsd98v-T-hLO6s2hE0

thanks, the relief sought includes a preliminary injunction, which suggests they'll seek relief now prior to allowing the state to Answer. However, that relief is predicated on the Governor trying to enforce his order or withholding funding. Since that hasn't happened yet (the allegations in the complaint are pretty tenuous) and the Governor hasn't taken any steps to do that, the court has grounds to let the normal process play out. Plus, the Boards that are plaintiffs here are keeping the mask mandates in place so the Governor's lawyers can say there is no imminent harm (to the extent there is any). So this could take a while after all.

The real parties being harmed are the families in those districts where the mandate is lifted. Those are the ones who can get immediate relief and should be suing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just glad that any enforcement of his nonsense EO will take time, even if it stands. And hopefully we will be in a better covid place in the spring.

This depends on if the school boards get a preliminary injunction to enjoin the EO. Otherwise the governor’s office could take action to enforce the EO and parents could sue any school district that tries to continue enforcing a mandate.

Realistically what is the governor going to actually do to enforce the action before this case is decided? Send in troops? Withhold funding? Of course not. Most likely he's just going to keep encouraging his supporters to not wear masks to antagonize the school administrators and teachers.

I suppose parents could sue, but that seems like a lot of effort for little gain when this larger action is already pending.

[Anonymous]

Oh goodie, let's waste money on lawsuit when we don't have to. There was already a legal challenge, we should have just waited for the outcome or better yet let Fairfax pay for this battle.

[Anonymous]

Nine days into his administrations already a defendant in two lawsuits, including one brought collectively by seven school systems. That level of fail takes some doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nine days into his administrations already a defendant in two lawsuits, including one brought collectively by seven school systems. That level of fail takes some doing.

So when the fleece vest comes off he’s just as terrible as Trump.

Will he be more competent at his dismantling of our democracy?

Trump 2.0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the Complaint

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21185299/nova-v-youngkin-complaint-for-declaratory-and-injunctive-relief.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2uFhry7E6IRySQeq4YpLNJiQ29c20eElD2cRqXpXsd98v-T-hLO6s2hE0

thanks, the relief sought includes a preliminary injunction, which suggests they'll seek relief now prior to allowing the state to Answer. However, that relief is predicated on the Governor trying to enforce his order or withholding funding. Since that hasn't happened yet (the allegations in the complaint are pretty tenuous) and the Governor hasn't taken any steps to do that, the court has grounds to let the normal process play out. Plus, the Boards that are plaintiffs here are keeping the mask mandates in place so the Governor's lawyers can say there is no imminent harm (to the extent there is any). So this could take a while after all.

The real parties being harmed are the families in those districts where the mandate is lifted. Those are the ones who can get immediate relief and should be suing.

You might want to try reading the full complaint before offering your purported legal insight.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have a list of districts keeping their mask mandates? I think there are more than people realize. It’s not just NoVA, Richmond and Hampton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh goodie, let's waste money on lawsuit when we don't have to. There was already a legal challenge, we should have just waited for the outcome or better yet let Fairfax pay for this battle.

The parents’ lawsuit wasn’t enough because they don’t have standing to asset certain potential harm from the EO that the schools can, such as risk of loss of federal funding and jeopardizing insurance coverage for covid-related claims. Miyares has filed a motion to dismiss the parents’ lawsuit on the grounds that the parents failed to allege adequate particularized injuries to them resulting from the EO. If the state were to prevail on that argument for the parents, the schools have a better chance of overcoming it.

[Anonymous]

So Northam's EO directing a mask mandate is fine? But Youngkin's EO directing a repeal of the mask mandate is not? One governor overstepped in forcing local school boards to submit to the EO? But the other governor did not overstep his authority?