Quantcast

Michigan Gov. Whitmer asks court to toss lawsuit over new face mask mandate

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Michigan Gov. Whitmer asks court to toss lawsuit over new face mask mandate

Hot Topics
Fff

Whitmer

KALAMAZOO, Mich. (Legal Newsline) – The “rogue government actors” sued for imposing social distancing restrictions in Michigan are asking a federal judge to throw the case out.

The Nov. 17 motion to dismiss from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Attorney General Dana Nessel and state health officials comes two weeks after federal judge Paul Maloney denied Libertas Christian School’s motion for injunctive relief.

“Plaintiff invokes an assortment of constitutional and other legal theories to challenge these restrictions, but they all boil down to the same request: Plaintiff asks this Court to override the judgment of the State’s public health experts and act in a manner contrary to what these experts determined is necessary to protect this State and its residents,” the motion says.

“Its request disregards the deference owed to the executive branch’s management of this public health crisis and threatens the progress made in combating the spread of this deadly virus.”

The lawsuit challenges the face mask mandate and other orders issued after the Michigan Supreme Court found that Whitmer’s previous orders had expired.

Libertas operates a Christian school and filed suit on Oct. 18. It says it has implemented several safety procedures to keep teachers and students safe and that no student has tested positive for COVID-19 this year.

Whitmer at first claimed a grace period during which her orders would stay in effect before admitting that isn’t the case, but the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services issued a face mask order on Oct. 5.

The Ottawa County Department of Public Health closed the school for violating post-Supreme Court ruling orders but has told the court it will allow it to reopen on Nov. 6. The school will be allowed certain face mask concessions while following the rest of the rest of the new orders.

The motion argues the defendants are immune from pending state-law claims under the Eleventh Amendment. It also says the federal court should abstain from deciding those state-law claims if it finds the defendants are not immune from them.

Judge Maloney has already indicated he would sit out the fight, refusing two weeks ago to rule on any alleged violations arising out of unsettled state law.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News