Court Grants Temporary Restraining Order To Keep PA School Mask Mandate In Place

PA Mask Mandate Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: A judge has granted a temporary restraining order to keep a mask mandate in place in the Pittsburgh-area Upper St. Clair School District. 
• Why: Parents claim the school district’s decision to make masks optional puts medically vulnerable students at risk.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was originally filed in Pennsylvania federal court.

A Pittsburgh-area school district has been ordered to temporarily keep its mask mandate policy in place after parents argued making masks optional puts medically vulnerable students at risk. 

The ruling to grant a temporary restraining order against the Upper St. Clair School District was a reversal of a decision made by a federal judge last week to deny the parents’ relief request. 

A group of anonymous parents claimed in a class action lawsuit filed last week that the school district’s decision to make masks optional violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, arguing it forces disabled students to choose between risking contracting COVID-19 or not being able to attend in-person class. 

In appealing to the Third Circuit, the parents argued the federal judge was wrong to determine they didn’t have standing based on their worries about an “increased risk” of contracting COVID-19. 

“Not only does defendants’ conduct subject plaintiffs to the foreseeable risk of physical injury or death, defendants’ conduct is also discriminatory and causes irreparable harm in violation of federal civil rights and disability laws,” the brief said. 

The parents also disagreed with the lower court’s conclusion that they had to first figure out potential remedies under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is related to providing free and appropriate public education. 

Parents Argue An ‘Increased Risk Of Harm Is A Harm’ 

Parents argued their claims did not involve IDEA, but rather that the district was violating the ADA by restricting access to disabled students. 

“Eliminating a disabled individual’s ability to meaningful access to government services, programs and activities unless that person accepts an increased risk of harm is a harm,” the brief said. 

The school district argued an interlocutory appeal of a temporary restraining order was “improper” and that it had not been fully argued and briefed. 

“Should this court accept the interlocutory appeal of the TRO, the school district requests sufficient time to brief and respond to these matters,” the district’s motion said.

A similar class action lawsuit was filed earlier this month against the Pennsylvania-based North Allegheny School District by parents who claim its decision to make masks optional puts the health of medically vulnerable students at risk. 

Do you have a student in a school district that enforces a mask mandate? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by Kenneth R. Behrend of Behrend Law Group LLC.

The PA Mask Mandate Class Action Lawsuit is John Doe 1, et al. v. Upper Saint Clair School District, et al., Case No. 22-1141, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• NYC Schools Vaccine Mandate Blocked in Appeals Court, Hearing Set for Wednesday
• Texas School District’s Mask-Optional Policy Targeted in Class Action Lawsuit
• Northwestern COVID Tuition Class Action Lawsuit Dumped by Federal Judge
• The Honest Company Lied to Investors About COVID’s Impact, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges