Posted on 09/27/2021 3:21:20 PM PDT by zaxtres
PHOENIX - A judge has struck down provisions Republican lawmakers tucked into the Arizona budget that block schools from requiring masks and restrict the power of local governments to impose COVID-19 requirements.
The ruling was made on Sept. 27, just days before the ban was officially set to take effect on Sept. 29. Despite the new laws banning mask mandates, at least 29 public school districts in Arizona have enacted their own mask requirements. The districts account for more more than a third of the approximately 930,000 students attending more than 2,000 schools run by public districts.
The ruling Monday could clear the way for cities and counties to enact mask requirements. The judge also said an entire budget measure that served as a catch-all for a wish list of conservative policy items was unconstitutional. The judge ruled in favor of a coalition of educators and allies who sued over Arizona laws prohibiting public school districts from imposing mask requirements, colleges from requiring vaccinations for students, and communities from establishing vaccine passports.
Declaratory judgment "Having considered the pleadings and counsels' oral argument and for the reasons stated, the court finds:
Sections 12, 21, and 50 of HB2898; Sections 12 and 13 of SB1824; Section 2 of SB 1825; and SB1819 violate the title and/or subject matter requirements of the Arizona Constitution, Art. IV, pt. 2, §13 (hereinafter ‘Section 13’), and are therefore void and unenforceable. Given the declaration that these provisions are unconstitutional under Section 13, the request for injunctive relief is moot. If non-compliance occurs, further relief is available under AR.S. §12-1838. Similarly, since HB2898, Section 12 (banning masks in public and charter schools) is unconstitutional under Section 13, the Court need not reach the issue of whether it violates the equal protection clause, Arizona Constitution, Article II, §13."
LIST: Arizona school districts with mask requirements
Phoenix Union School District statement Phoenix Union is pleased with the outcome of today’s ruling from the Maricopa County Superior Court. From day one, we have been committed to safely reopening our schools and doing everything in our power to provide uninterrupted in-person learning. The CDC’s recent finding that schools without a masking requirement are 3.5 times more likely to have a COVID-19 outbreak reinforces our masking protocol that has been in place since August 2. The two most effective ways to minimize spread of the virus are the vaccine and universal masking while indoors. For information about PXU’s mitigation efforts, including vaccination clinics, please visit www.PXU.org/BeHealthy. As of today, over 300,000 of Arizona’s children attend a school that requires masks. This ruling can now impact all 1.1 million students who call Arizona’s public schools home. Phoenix Union will trust the guidance of national, state, and local healthcare experts and continue our current masking protocol as a protection to our students, staff, and families.
Arguments were heard Sept. 13
Arizona judge has until late September to decide to challenge mask mandate ban in schools A judge heard arguments Sept. 13 in the case, which sought to overturn several new Arizona laws that restrict the power of local governments and school districts to impose COVID-19 restrictions such as mask mandates.
The laws in question prohibit public school districts from imposing mask requirements, bar universities from requiring vaccinations for students and forbid communities from establishing vaccine passports for people to show they are inoculated.
A coalition of educators, parents and children’s advocacy groups argue in their lawsuit that the provisions were unconstitutionally tucked into unrelated budget bills. They argued the provisions in several budget bills violate constitutional rules requiring laws to focus on only one subject, and have their contents reflected in the title of the bills. In the case of the school mask ban, they allege it violates equal protection provisions because it does not apply to private school
LIST: Mask or no mask? Which retailers and restaurants are requiring face coverings
LIST: More than a dozen Arizona venues requiring COVID-19 vaccines, negative tests
Based on this legal contention, the coalition is asking the judge to undo two other laws unrelated to COVID-19 prevention efforts.
One law prohibits the use of state money for teachings at schools that infer that one race is inherently racist, should be discriminated against or feel guilty because of their race. Another law establishes a legislative committee to review the findings of the state Senate review of the November 2020 election results in Maricopa County. The Legislature has routinely tucked all sorts of unrelated items into the budget bills but this year crammed many more than usual. The challengers allege they violate the constitution in each instance.
"Does a bill titled ‘Relating to State Budget Procedures’ give notice that it includes new, substantive legislation covering everything from the definition of ‘newspaper’ to condominium termination requirements, and from investigation of social media platforms to dog racing permitting?" attorney Roopali Desai wrote. "Of course not."
Meanwhile, the attorney representing Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich claims they were legally enacted because how the Legislature writes measures and chooses the content are questions for lawmakers, not for the courts. They also argue the groups don’t have a right to sue, because they have not been harmed by the laws.
Attorney Patrick Irvine, representing Brnovich, said a court ruling agreeing that the Legislature violated either the title or single-subject rules could upend years of enacted "budget reconciliation bills" or "omnibus reconciliation bills" that also added unrelated policy items. Irvine said if the court is concerned about the Legislature’s practice, it should ban it going forward, not block the current laws.
MORE: Arizona's AG rebuffs Biden DOE's mask probe: Won't 'tolerate' efforts to undermine state sovereignty
"Potentially upsetting scores of BRBs and ORBs, with no warning, would be highly inequitable to the democratic process in Arizona over the last several decades," Irvine wrote.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Probably half the parents are smart enough to know how much masks are hurting their children with gum disease, oxygen depletion and psychological problems. They should all pull their children from mask mandating schools. Resist and refuse.
I agree with this judge.
But I also agree that anything the Federal government does regarding education is also unconstitutional.
Oops! I misread the headline. I disagree strongly with this judge.
I completely concur.
The answer to both the judge and the legislators is ...no
It is just you because you are finding something to nitpick about.
And you broke up mask mandate ban wrong. For example you would have broken up peanut butter and jelly sandwich and then platter the same when peanut butter and jelly sandwich platter is all one thing.
I've been saying for some time we forget about DC even State Capitols and rally/protest within legal distance of the homes of judges and politicians. Check out the local laws regarding distance from the home. I've read there are laws that require a minimum distance like down the block.
Whatever you do, DO NOT involve their children in any manner. If the subject of the rally has their children in their car going to and from the residence, stop the chanting/noise. If the children see the signs from the car or outside their window from down the street, that is fair.
Also, the subject of the rally may not need to be there. However, check with the local, county, and State LEO's. Just call and ask about your assembly. They will probably have time and crowd restrictions. Do your homework.
The above is the only way our side will start getting their attention. I've read 2 school boards recently reversed some bad policies after the parents made a big noise at the meetings and some protesting outside their residences.
I read a story years back of a town board that enacted a law that said people couldn’t park campers in front of their houses even in their driveways. Nobody complied, so they hired someone to write $500 dollar tickets. One night each of the five little dictators found cinder blocks fell through their windshields. The law was rescinded at the next meeting.
Not sure if you noticed that it is the Arizona State Constitution the judge claimed to be enforcing. No, I didn’t read the ruling. If you did, please explain how it was wrong re:AZ Constitution. Thank you.
The judge also said an entire budget measure that served as a
catch-all for a wish list of conservative policy items was
unconstitutional.
Unconstitutional? LMAO
States cannot make rules that cities and school districts
have to abide by now? It’s unconstitutional if they do?
Funny, I don’t recall ever seeing a judge state that, “a
catch-all for a wish list of Leftist policy items was
unconstitutional.
She tipped her hand.
She’s evidently a Leftist and can’t stomach the idea Republican
got their measures through.
She striking down portions of a state bill, she most certainly
has over-ruled the Legislature, and that is Legislating
from the bench. She determines what the final
legislation will look like. She determined the bill’s
final draft.
That is legislating from the bench.
Nevermind. I gather it’s a fight over including un-related items into a budget bill. Gee, the dem/soc/commies do it all the time.
Too bad...so sad.
What element of the state Constitution is the judge upholding ?
Yep, theydo.
Looks like the legislature had better go back to the drawing board. When will they be in session again? If not in session they had better call a special session.
It is way past time for all Republicans to show a spine. (especially Ducey)
Ignore the judge. The judge has a right to an opinion but has no right to make law. If the people don’t like the law they can vote out their senator/representative/governor for enacting it. The judge can pound sand. It’s important to remember that a law duly passed is still the law until the legislature changes or abolishes it.
So running for school boards doesn’t work if a communist judge can overturn anything you do?
Without religion, the people in robes become the high priests and priestesses in our Society.
Was there a factual basis for allowing a reduction of our freedom to be free from masks? Does not due process require that there be a basis for any deprivation of liberty in this country?
Is a deprivation of rights not a denial of due process when there is no factual or rational basis for that act?
Doesn’t anyone have to prove that masks are in any measure effective for the purposes intended?
I guess not. The burden used to be on the entity trying to take away a right of the people. Now, the burden is met by a mere rule without evidence of need or effectiveness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.