Judge’s Ruling Provide New Weapon to Obtain Mask Mandates; ADA Prohibits Mask Bans, But May Also Compel Wearing of Masks
Q3 2021 hedge fund letters, conferences and more
A New Weapon To Obtain Mask Mandates
Federal judge Lee Yeakel's ruling that governmental bans on mask mandates violate the rights to special protection children with disabilities have under the Americans With Disabilities Act [ADA] provides a powerful new weapon to fight such bans, since most classrooms subject to no-mask mandates include as least a few kids with breathing problems such as asthma, hay fever, allergies, etc.
But the ruling might also be used to require workplaces and places of pubic accommodation to require the wearing of masks, at least by those not yet vaccinated, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who explains that he was able to use the ADA to require smoking bans in offices and in many other pubic places because many adults as well as children with breathing problems were entitled to them under the this federal statute.
Indeed, he notes,using the ADA was even effective against those who smoke outdoors, because they then bring tobacco residue inside where it can adversely affect others.
Accommodation For People With Breathing Disability Or Other Health Problems
Children in schools as well as elsewhere, and many adults, have a breathing disability or other health problem which requires that they receive a reasonable accommodation to their condition. Since so many businesses as well as governments require masks to be worn, it's obviously a accommodation which is reasonable, argues Banzhaf.
Employers which require their employees to operate in offices and other work places without masks, a well as schools which force children to attend in a room with unvaccinated children not wearing masks, should be sued under the Americans With Disabilities Act, says Banzhaf, who helped bring dozens of such cases on behalf of those with breathing difficulties to obtain bans on smoking to protect them,
So, again the ADA can be used as a powerful weapon and legal tool to protect the public health and reduce unnecessary deaths, says the professor, who has been called the "Law Professor Who Masterminded Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry," he "Man Behind the Ban on Cigarette Commercials, a "King of Class-Action Lawsuits," and "a Driving Force Behind the Lawsuits That Have Cost Tobacco Companies Millions of Dollars."
