Austin may continue to apply for a local mask warrant for the time being, the judge said

Austin and Travis County may continue to ask for masks at least a little longer after a district judge rejected Attorney General Ken Paxton’s request to temporarily block the local warrant.

Paxton has sued local officials for refusing to end his term after Gov. Greg Abbott lifted state restrictions earlier this month. Paxton will probably challenge the decision.

District Judge Lora Livingston has not yet issued a final ruling on the merits of the case, which means Austin and Travis officials can later be told to comply with state officials.

But in the meantime, County Judge Andy Brown said Friday’s ruling at least increases the time masks are needed in their communities – which gives them more time to vaccinate their residents.

“We did everything we could to protect the health and safety of the people of Travis County,” Brown said in an interview. “And Judge Livingston’s ruling today allows us to continue to do that.”

Abbott ended almost all of COVID-19’s state security restrictions on March 10, including the state-wide mask warrant, citing declines in COVID-19 hospitalizations and cases. Many public health experts said the move was too soon before most of the state was vaccinated or even eligible for a shooting.

In his order, Abbott said “no jurisdiction” can require a person to wear a mask in public if the area does not meet a certain threshold for coronavirus hospitalizations in that hospital region. As a result, many local governments have dropped restrictions. However, this was not the case in Travis County, where officials said they would continue to request the use of the public mask.

Paxton sued Austin and Travis counties the day after state restrictions were lifted. He argued that Abbott’s order replaced all local jurisdictions.

State attorneys asked the judge to issue a temporary order the next day, but Livingston said it would not have been fair to give the defendants just one day of training. Therefore, in the meantime, masks were needed in Travis County.

“Every day we can maintain the mandate of the local health authority is a victory,” Austin Mayor Steve Adler said in an interview. with The Texas Tribune on Friday. “The fact that we managed to keep him in position for the last two weeks, during the spring break, is a victory, no matter how long it lasts.”

Adler said that as the number of cases decreases and eligibility for vaccination expands, the city may continue plans to open more companies – but the mask mandate should remain in place.

“You can wear masks and still open businesses, you can wear masks and you can have more students at school,” Adler said. “You could wear masks and do all these things and it’s such a low price to pay to protect lives and people. “

Texas has seen conditions improve as new COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations have fallen to October lows. Vaccinations are on the rise, with more than 11.5% of the population fully vaccinated – although black and Hispanic Texans face systemic medical inequities and are vaccinated at disproportionately low rates. Starting Monday, all Texans over the age of 16 will be eligible to register for a vaccine meeting.

But even as the numbers improve, Dr. Mark Escott, the interim health authority in Travis County, testified in court on Friday that in the past week he has seen a downward trend. And with COVID-19 strain variants mixed, Escott said the situation could worsen without public health intervention.

“It’s clear we haven’t beaten COVID-19 yet,” Escott said. “And it’s clear that if we’re able to maintain those protections, it will save us time to vaccinate more people and ultimately save lives.”

This is not the first time Paxton has sued COVID-19 restrictions. In December, Paxton successfully sued Austin and Travis County in connection with local officials who implemented an overnight extinguishing over the New Year’s holiday weekend. However, the case was not decided until after the holiday, and officials implemented the timing.

Paxton also blocked the El Paso County order, which told non-essential companies to close in November.

The end result of the case could have implications for other Texas cities and counties on how local governments can enforce their own public health mandates, even after the state has ordered them to cease.

During Friday’s hearing, discussions generally focused on the question: what powers do local public health departments have and how do they affect the governor’s emergency powers?

Attorneys Austin and Travis said public health officials have the authority to implement health measures – such as mask warrants – outside the context of the pandemic, and therefore should not be affected by the latest Texas order. .

State attorneys have argued that Abbott’s emergency powers over the pandemic go beyond any local order.

Livingston rejected some of the state attorney’s arguments that not requiring masks allows for individual freedom.

“I’m trying to understand why the person with the deadly virus should have more power than the person who’s trying to stay alive and not catch the deadly virus,” Livingston said.

She pointed to previous examples of Abbott’s delegation in response to the pandemic to local governments – and said she understood why officials said they had received mixed messages.

“It must be quite confusing for local officials to know when they are accused, in the governor’s mind, and have the responsibility to react locally and take local control – and when they shouldn’t,” Livingston told state attorneys. “I just had to let you know that I could find such a puzzle.”

Neelam Bohra contributed to this story.

Disclosure: Steve Adler is a former chairman of the board of the Texas Tribune and was a financial supporter of the Tribune, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial backers play no role in Tribune journalism. Find a complete list of them here.