Quantcast

ST. LOUIS RECORD

Tuesday, April 30, 2024

AG Schmitt sues St. Louis County alleging its COVID-19 mask mandate is prohibited

Hot Topics
Schmitterichorizontal

Schmitt

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt sued St. Louis County last week alleging that its new mask requirement approved by local legislators on Jan. 4 is an untimely and prohibited order.

Schmitt alleges in his complaint that last week’s local mandate is prohibited based on a July 26, 2021 mask mandate, which was terminated by the St. Louis County Council on July 27, 2021.

“Because the July 26 Mask Mandate is a 'prohibited order' under § 67.265.5, Defendant cannot lawfully ‘make or modify any orders that have the effect, directly or indirectly, of a prohibited 11 order under this section,’” Schmitt wrote in his complaint. “Yet that is exactly what the January 5 Mask Mandate does—it has the same 'effect' as the prohibited July 26 Mask Mandate.”

The County Council voted 4-3 to approve the latest mask mandate, which became effective last week on Jan. 5.

“The issue of masks has been, highly, unfortunately, politicized on a national level, state level, and local level,” said Dave Dillon, Missouri Hospital Association (MHA) spokesperson.

The mandate requires masks indoors in public places for the vaccinated and unvaccinated who are older than 5 years old, according to media reports.

“The attorney general is suing because he believes that that is a violation that extends also to public boards of education,” Dillon told the St. Louis Record. “It has created a lot of questions about where the authority lies.”

Schmitt argues in the lawsuit that St. Louis County's January 5 mask mandate, and any subsequent public health order cannot be made or modified until 150 days after December 9, 2021. The lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County and names St. Louis County as a sole defendant.

“Pursuant to subdivision 1, the September 27 Mask Mandate shall not remain in effect for longer than thirty calendar days in a one hundred eighty-day period, including the cumulative duration of similar orders issued concurrently, consecutively, or successively," Schmitt states in the brief. "Because it did not expire and was not approved, the September 27 Mask Mandate became a prohibited order. All the Mask Mandates place restrictions on access to business organizations, churches, schools, or other places of public or private gathering or assembly because they limit access to those entities only to masked individuals or individuals who fall under an exception to the mask requirement."

Despite the controversy, MHA supports Missourians wearing masks, according to Dillon. The healthcare lobbying organization had tried to depoliticize masking as "not a symbol but a tool" with an advertising campaign last year.

“We ran the ads at our own expense but the truth is that our ability to do that in a national environment is pretty limited,” he said. “We believe it will protect you as does everybody from the CDC on down. The real question in Missouri has been whether it can be mandated in a locality or not.”

More News