A federal judge Friday afternoon denied a request by parents suing the Upper Saint Clair School District to reinstitute a mandatory masking policy.

In a 32-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Williams S. Stickman said that the families of five medically fragile children in the district who sought the temporary restraining order failed to show that their lawsuit would likely succeed.

In his opinion, Stickman wrote that he recognizes that the issue over mandatory masking elicits strong feelings on both sides.

“The court’s decision in this case, however, cannot be based on which position it believes is wiser or more prudent in light of the continually developing public health situation,” he said. “Prudential judgments about policy are left to the people, through their elected officials.”

Instead, Stickman wrote, his decision was based solely on the law.

Stickman noted that his decision is counter to that of another judge in the Western District of Pennsylvania, Marilyn Horan, who recently issued a decision reinstating mandatory masking at North Allegheny School District.

Decisions of federal district court judges are not binding precedent, Stickman wrote, and even in the same jurisdiction, individual judges are not required to follow the decisions of another.

The plaintiffs in the Upper St. Clair case filed the complaint in federal court on Wednesday. They alleged that the board’s vote on Jan. 10 to rescind the mandatory masking policy put their children and hundreds of others who are immunocompromised or medically fragile in the district at risk.

Related:

• Parents sue Upper St. Clair School District over lifting of mask mandate

Stickman heard arguments on the temporary restraining order that would have reinstated mandatory masking on Thursday morning.

An attorney for the school district argued that reasonable accommodations would be made for any student with medical concerns to ensure that they remain safe.

But the attorney for the students argued that accommodations that lead to isolation or segregation violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

In his opinion, Stickman said that plaintiffs failed to meet the legal requirements of a temporary restraining order, including showing that their request for universal masking is reasonable.

Stickman said it is not, especially given that it “is not guaranteed to be effective.”

“In other words, plaintiffs may still become infected with Covid-19,” the judge wrote. “It is common knowledge that wearing a mask is no guarantee against infection.”

Stickman noted, too, that the school district’s health and safety plan includes a number of measures to curb the spread of covid-19, including physical distancing, cleaning, ventilation and screening and promoting vaccination clinics to students and staff.

“There is no allegation, nor have facts been adduced, to suggest that any policy of the school board prevents plaintiffs’ children from masking,” he wrote. “They remain free to do so.”

Stickman wrote that the plaintiffs also failed to show that they have suffered an injury from the reversal of the masking order. The families allege that the lack of a mask mandate puts their children at greater risk of contracting covid-19, or forces them to move to online schooling and suffer educationally.

Stickman wrote that a hypothetical or future injury is not sufficient.

“[P]laintiffs cannot plead or prove that absent universal masking they will contract Covid-19,” he said. “[P]laintiffs take the position that, absent universal masking, they will face an unacceptable risk if they attend school in person. This risk, though, is just that — a risk. It is not a concrete and imminent injury.”

Stickman wrote that granting the temporary restraining order would “risk upsetting the system of popular governance of schools that is an important part of our system of layered and answerable government.

“The sole accommodation demanded by plaintiffs would supersede the democratic vote of the school board on an issue that elicits strong feelings not only from plaintiffs, but also from other members of the public.”

---

Copyright ©2025— Trib Total Media, LLC (TribLIVE.com)

---