Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is just throwing out the lawsuit. The executive order is still halted.

The executive order is being cheered across the state. I know that’s what you meant to type.

It isn’t, though. It remained Exhibit 1 of Youngkin’s breathtaking incompetence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is just throwing out the lawsuit. The executive order is still halted.

The executive order is being cheered across the state. I know that’s what you meant to type.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The title of this thread is completely misleading as the VSC very clearly DID NOT side with Youngkin.

So weird that someone would misinterpret data to support their own lopsided view of the world. It's like this has never happened on the right before.

Anonymous wrote:The court sided with Youngkin and rejected the petition, which was filed by a group of parents in Chesapeake.

Congratulations Governor Youngkin!

[ Edit by admin: Title changed to better reflect the facts ]

Anonymous wrote:The case was dismissed on a technicality (parents were seeking improper type of relief) and the court specifically states in the order that it does not make a finding on the legality of the EO. Of course, AG Miyares basically misstates the ruling in his press release. This article explains decently well.

https://www.13newsnow.com/amp/article/news/politics/supreme-court-virginia-chesapeake-parents-school-mask-lawsuit/291-6ab71c2c-283d-426e-ad0b-76d37034d202

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The title of this thread is completely misleading as the VSC very clearly DID NOT side with Youngkin.

So weird that someone would misinterpret data to support their own lopsided view of the world. It's like this has never happened on the right before.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The title of this thread is completely misleading as the VSC very clearly DID NOT side with Youngkin.

+1. The plaintiffs didn’t request proper relief. The VSC did not rule on the merits. Why can’t people read a few pages of opinions before spouting uneducated opinions?

People misinterpret legal decisions all the time. The plaintiffs can refile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The title of this thread is completely misleading as the VSC very clearly DID NOT side with Youngkin.

+1. The plaintiffs didn’t request proper relief. The VSC did not rule on the merits. Why can’t people read a few pages of opinions before spouting uneducated opinions?

Anonymous wrote:The title of this thread is completely misleading as the VSC very clearly DID NOT side with Youngkin.

Anonymous wrote:Details please. Did this just happen?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is just throwing out the lawsuit. The executive order is still halted.

The executive order is being cheered across the state. I know that’s what you meant to type.

Anonymous wrote:How abut if they voluntarily dropped the matter and transitioned to 'masks optional'.

I'm sure there are many parents like me who voted for Terry McAuliffe but who are more than ready for this transition to happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Decision was only procedural. It also basically confirmed that SBs have authority to supervise their own schools districts, so SB could impose a mask requirement even if SB 1303 doesn't "require" them to mask. Consistent with other cases according deference to local SBs.

The SBs' case is much bigger than masks. It's about preserving their own authority, vested in them by the VA constitution. I bet that's why FCC, which had already voted to go mask optional on 2/14, signed on to the suit. This time a Gov's EO is about masks, but what will the next one cover? They (IMO rightfully) don't want to cede their authority and acquiesce to a political overreach like Youngkin's EO (and, once again for those in the back, Northam's EO was different because it was issued during a public health emergency so the executive had greater powers during that time).

Conservative school districts should be signing on too. In a state that is both closely divided and largely composed of very red and very blue areas, no local government should view ceding power to the state government as a good thing.

Anonymous wrote:Decision was only procedural. It also basically confirmed that SBs have authority to supervise their own schools districts, so SB could impose a mask requirement even if SB 1303 doesn't "require" them to mask. Consistent with other cases according deference to local SBs.

The SBs' case is much bigger than masks. It's about preserving their own authority, vested in them by the VA constitution. I bet that's why FCC, which had already voted to go mask optional on 2/14, signed on to the suit. This time a Gov's EO is about masks, but what will the next one cover? They (IMO rightfully) don't want to cede their authority and acquiesce to a political overreach like Youngkin's EO (and, once again for those in the back, Northam's EO was different because it was issued during a public health emergency so the executive had greater powers during that time).