A judge has ordered the Illinois State Board of Education to reinstate, for now, the standing of a suburban private Christian school, which was punished by the state for resisting Gov. JB Pritzker’s school mask mandate.
And the decision is the latest indicator Pritzker never had the power under the law to use the State Board of Education in that manner to enforce his mandates, say officials at Parkview Christian Academy.
On Sept. 29, Judge Stephen Krentz, in far southwest suburban Kendall County, granted a temporary restraining order sought by Parkview against ISBE, in the opening round of Parkview’s legal challenge to unprecedented ISBE took against it for refusing to comply with Pritzker’s COVID-related mandates.
“Defendants (the ISBE) have failed to cite any specific provision of the School Code expressly granting to the Defendants the authority to implement the emergency powers they have delegated to themselves in response to the COVID-19 pandemic,” Judge Kretnz wrote in his TRO ruling.
“… It is difficult to reconcile the manner in which the ISBE treats public and nonpublic schools without reaching the conclusion that the rules regulating the nonrecognition of nonpublic schools are more burdensome than they are for public schools.
“Parkview has accordingly demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits in this regard.”
The order restored Parkview’s status to “fully recognized,” as the court more fully considers Parkview’s lawsuit against the state.
Parkview, located in Yorkville, sued the state Board of Education after the state took swift action to punish the private school for allegedly defying Pritzker’s orders to require students and school personnel to wear masks and otherwise comply with COVID rules and guidance issued by the Illinois Department of Public Health.
The lawsuit didn’t challenge the governor’s orders, nor the public health rules and guidance.
Rather, the lawsuit sought a court order blocking Illinois state education officials from moving as quickly as they did to strip Parkview of its status as a state recognized nonpublic school.
That recognition entitles Parkview to a host of benefits, including state endorsement of its diplomas, access to funding sources administered by the state, and the opportunity for the school’s sports teams to participate in events sanctioned by the Illinois High School Association (IHSA), among others.
In its complaint, Parkview asserted the state Board of Education violated state law by taking away Parkview’s recognized status without the opportunity to correct the alleged misconduct during a probationary period, and without the opportunity for a hearing or appeal.
Such due process opportunities are granted to public school districts under state law. Parkview argues the way in which state officials stripped the school of its recognized status violated the law by burdening Parkview with standards and disciplinary processes more severe than those imposed on public schools.
Further, Parkview argued the Board of Education lacks the power altogether to deny private schools recognition for not complying with such mandates from the governor. And they argued the Board cannot simply delegate that authority to State Superintendent of Education Carmen Ayala, to execute at her discretion.
Parkview sought both a temporary restraining order and a permanent court order barring the state from summarily taking away its recognized status for not complying with Pritzker’s orders.
In response, the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, representing ISBE, said the emergency situation presented by the COVID pandemic justified the actions taken against Parkview.
They noted a Springfield judge had approved court orders in 2020 against Parkview, requiring the school to uphold “safe practices in light of COVID-19, including the use of face coverings in schools.”
The state said it took action in late August after it received “complaints,” including one sent before Parkview had begun classes, “alleging that Parkview was failing to comply with (Pritzker’s) Executive Order by not requiring face coverings inside the school.”
After Ayala stripped Parkview of its recognition, Parkview filed suit.
“… While Parkview contends that no amount of money can quantify the loss Parkview will incur as a result of nonrecognition status, Parkview’s argument ignores the broader reality of why the revocation occurred in the first place, namely its own voluntary noncompliance with life-saving public health measures,” the state wrote. “No amount of money can also quantify the loss of potential life and injury to the public in failing to adhere to the Executive Order and Revised Guidelines implemented to keep students, faculty and the community safe.”
The state also pledged to schedule Parkview’s requested appeal hearing, and to “work with Parkview on the simple issue of complying with the mask mandate.”
In court, however, Judge Krentz said Parkview raised “fair questions” on whether the state had acted outside the law in the way it punished Parkview.
Those “fair questions,” he said, include whether Ayala can make such decisions herself;
Whether Parkview and other private schools which haven been stripped of state recognition have been treated unfairly, compared to public schools;
And, whether Parkview was denied its rights to due process, under the state School Code.
The judge noted public school districts cannot be stripped of their state recognition without first entering probation, and without the ability to appeal.
“… The legislature made it clear in the School Code that guidelines and procedures for recognizing nonpublic schools may necessarily be different than the guidelines for recognizing public schools, but they may not be more burdensome,” Krentz wrote.
Further, the judge noted the Illinois General Assembly has not taken steps to change state law to expressly grant Pritzker and the ISBE the powers it claims it has to act against private schools as they have.
He noted lawmakers have clarified other aspects of state law in response to COVID-19.
“This court finds it significant that the legislature has not yet seen fit to engage in similar efforts to amend the School Code to grant additional emergency powers to the ISBE to undertake the actions challenged by Parkview herein,” the judge wrote. “Inasmuch as an administrative agency is a creature of statute, any power or authority claimed by it must find its source within the provisions of the statute by which it is created.”
Following the ruling, Parkview Board of Trustees President Jed Davis applauded the decision, saying it was necessary in light of the state’s actions “coming down with an iron fist” on any school that questions the state’s orders.
Davis noted some in Springfield have introduced legislation specifically to address the state Board’s questionable ability to act against schools in this manner.
He noted the state school recognition process is governed by various criteria.
“And nowhere does it say we must comply with public health orders,” said Davis. ““The state here is talking out of both sides of its mouth on this. If ISBE actually already had this authority to do these things, as they claim, why in the world would anyone be introducing legislation to give them the same authority?
“It’s a question of critical importance.”
Parkview is represented in the case by attorney Carlo Colosimo, of Colosimo Ewing and Smith, of Plano.