A state appeals court has allowed Florida officials to continue enforcing Gov. Ron DeSantis’ ban on school mask mandates, overturning a district court ruling that supported pro-mask-mandate parents.
DeSantis last week appealed a decision by Leon County Court Judge John Cooper, who sided with parents seeking to end the state’s ban on school-district mask mandates in the wake of spiking coronavirus cases in Florida. Cooper ruled the mask mandate ban should not be enforced while the litigation continues.
“Just like last year in the school reopening litigation, the First District Court of Appeal has reinstated Florida’s ability to protect the freedom for parents to make the best decisions for their children while they make their own ruling on appeal,” Christina Pushaw, DeSantis’ press secretary, told the Florida Record in an email. “We look forward to winning the appeal and will continue to fight for parents’ rights.”
Charles Gallagher, the attorney representing plaintiffs in the litigation, expressed disappointment about the appeals court ruling, saying on Twitter that he would ask the Florida Supreme Court to take up the issue since it affects people around the state.
“With a stay in place, students, parents and teachers are back in harm’s way,” Gallagher said.
Several local school districts in Florida have been defying the governor’s ban on mask mandates, pointing to the COVID-19 Delta variant as a threat to the health of many students and teachers.
The First District Court of Appeal’s decision to allow enforcement of the ban was issued Sept. 10 in Tallahassee.
“When a public officer or agency seeks appellate review, which is the case here, there is a presumption under the rule in favor of a stay, and the stay should be vacated only for the most compelling of reasons,” the appeals court’s order states.
In granting the governor’s motion, the court also expressed additional concerns about the district court’s handling of the case.
“Upon our review of the trial court’s final judgment and the operative pleadings, we have serious doubts about standing, jurisdiction and other threshold matters,” the First District’s order says. “These doubts significantly militate against the likelihood of the appellees’ ultimate success in this appeal.”