Motion to Dismiss

Summary

A motion to dismiss filed July 1, 2022 by Defendants Governor Kim Reynolds and Ann Lebo in The Arc of Iowa et al. v. Kim Reynolds, in her official capacity as Governor of Iowa, et al., Case No. 4:21-cv-00264-RP-HCA, Document 86, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. The State moves under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) to dismiss claims that section 280.31 violates title II of the ADA, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 by preventing universal mask mandates in schools. It argues that the plaintiffs lack standing, that the claims are moot under Arc of Iowa v. Reynolds, 33 F.4th 1042, that administrative remedies were not exhausted, and that ARPA provides no private cause of action. It is signed by Assistant Attorney General Samuel P. Langholz.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

       Case 4:21-cv-00264-RP-HCA Document 86 Filed 07/01/22 Page 1 of 3




                     IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
                               CENTRAL DIVISION


 THE ARC OF IOWA et al.,                         Case No. 4:21-CV-00264-RP-SBJ

 Plaintiffs,

 v.                                                Defendants Governor Kim
                                                   Reynolds and Ann Lebo’s
 KIM REYNOLDS, in her official                         Motion to Dismiss
 capacity as Governor of Iowa, et al.

 Defendants.


      COME NOW Defendants Governor Kim Reynolds and Ann Lebo (collectively,

“the State”) and move under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (b)(6) to

dismiss this case:

      1.   Plaintiffs sued Governor Reynolds, Iowa Department of Education Director

Ann Lebo, and ten school districts, alleging that section 280.31 violates title II of the

Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and

the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (“ARPA”) because it prevents their schools

from implementing universal mask mandates to protect their children. Compl., Doc.

1 ¶ 76–102.

      2.   But Plaintiffs claims all fail and should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1)

and (b)(6).

      3.   First, Plaintiffs lack standing for two reasons. They aren’t injured by

section 280.31 because it doesn’t prevent schools from complying with federal law.
      Case 4:21-cv-00264-RP-HCA Document 86 Filed 07/01/22 Page 2 of 3




And any injury isn’t redressed by this suit because enjoining section 280.31’s

enforcement won’t provide them a universal mask mandate.

     4.   Second, their claims are moot. The Eighth Circuit held that their request

for a preliminary injunction was moot because of the changed circumstances of the

pandemic. See Arc of Iowa v. Reynolds, 33 F.4th 1042, 1044–45 (8th Cir. 2022). That

decision is now law of the case. And since they seek the same relief permanently as

an injunction or declaratory judgment, the suit as a whole is also moot.

     5.   Third, Plaintiffs are barred from asserting their federal-disability-law

claims because they haven’t exhausted administrative remedies. And even looking

past this defect, the novel claims fail as a matter of law because section 280.31 is a

neutral, nondiscriminatory State policy set in statute and thus doesn’t violate federal

disability law. Universal mask mandates in schools are not a reasonable modification

to this policy because it would be an undue burden, fundamentally alter the nature

of the State’s education program, and infringe on the rights of others. What’s more, a

contrary interpretation would raise serious constitutional concerns.

     6.   Finally, Plaintiffs’ alternative claim based on ARPA also fails. Neither the

text of the ARPA statute nor the agency guidance requires schools to impose—or have

the discretion to impose—universal mask mandates. Interpreting either to impose

such a requirement would raise serious constitutional concerns. And regardless,

ARPA provides no private cause of action to enforce whatever requirements might be

hidden somewhere in it.




                                        —2—
      Case 4:21-cv-00264-RP-HCA Document 86 Filed 07/01/22 Page 3 of 3




     7.   The State has set forth its arguments in detail in its Brief in Support of

Motion to Dismiss, which is attached to its motion to file an overlength brief.

     WHEREFORE, Defendants Governor Kim Reynolds and Ann Lebo request that

the Complaint be dismissed, and all costs be assessed to Plaintiffs.

                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                        THOMAS J. MILLER
                                        Attorney General of Iowa

                                        JEFFREY S. THOMPSON
                                        Solicitor General

                                        /s/ Samuel P. Langholz
                                        SAMUEL P. LANGHOLZ
                                        Assistant Attorney General
                                        Iowa Department of Justice
                                        1305 E. Walnut Street, 2nd Floor
                                        Des Moines, Iowa 50319
                                        (515) 281-5164
                                        (515) 281-4209 (fax)
                                        sam.langholz@ag.iowa.gov
                                        jeffrey.thompson@ag.iowa.gov

                                        ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
                                        GOVERNOR KIM REYNOLDS AND
                                        ANN LEBO

                                                           PROOF OF SERVICE
                                          The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was
                                         served upon all parties of record by delivery in the following
                                         manner on July 1, 2022:

                                            U.S. Mail                            Email
                                            Hand Delivery                        Overnight Courier
                                            Federal Express                      Other
                                            CM/ECF

                                        Signature: /s/ Samuel P. Langholz




                                        —3—


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.iasd.77124.86.0.pdf

Size

131,999 bytes

SHA-256

619222b1ece25d6477d65c2f92634f7f0f145a2fe8bfa2d6aaa6768094fd2aba

Our copy

gov.uscourts.iasd.77124.86.0.pdf

Original

archive.org