Escalating tensions between Texas state officials and the leaders of some of the stateâs biggest cities, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton‘s office warned officials in Austin, Dallas and San Antonio on Tuesday to roll back âunlawfulâ local emergency orders that impose stricter coronavirus restrictions than the state has issued â and hinted that there will be lawsuits if they do not.
As he begins to reopen the Texas economy in phases, Gov. Greg Abbott has allowed a statewide stay-at-home order to lapse and certain businesses to reopen at limited capacity â 25% in the stateâs urban areas. While businesses have the choice of whether to reopen, Abbott has said cities and municipalities do not: His order supersedes any from local officials who wish to extend strict social distancing protocols and keep their local industries shuttered longer.
But some local officials, whose disagreements with Abbott have hardly disappeared as the state contends with the coronavirus pandemic, have put out orders that are stricter than the stateâs, directing individuals to wear masks in public and instructing them to shelter in place.
Those directives are unlawful and canât stand, the attorney generalâs office wrote in letters to Austin Mayor Steve Adler, Travis County Judge Sarah Eckhardt, San Antonio Mayor Ron Nirenberg, Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff and Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins.
âWe trust you will act quickly to correct these mistakes to avoid further confusion and litigation challenging these unconstitutional and unlawful restrictions,â wrote Ryan Vassar, an attorney for the state, in three similar letters to city and county leaders.
The letter says that local officials had overstepped in restricting which essential businesses could open. In Dallas County, Jenkins declared recently that law offices could not yet open; a San Antonio-area mandate required essential businesses to provide masks to employees. Both are âinvalid,â according to the attorney generalâs office.
And local orders to shelter in place are âunenforceable,â Paxtonâs office argued, because they go beyond Abbottâs requirement, which is merely to minimize social gatherings among people who do not live in the same household.
In Dallas, Austin and San Antonio, public safety orders stated that individuals âshallâ cover their faces. Abbott encouraged Texans to wear face masks but did not require it, and said no local authorities could impose civil or criminal penalties against individuals who refused. The attorney general’s office’s letters insisted that local governments did not have the authority to issue any mask requirement, even if they didnât threaten fines or jail time.
âYour orders purport to strip Texans of their agency,â Vassar wrote. âAlthough your orders ârequireâ individuals to wear masks when they leave their home, they are free to choose whether to wear one or not.â
Local officials shot back that Paxtonâs letters mischaracterize their restrictions, which they said complied with Abbott’s. Jenkins said in a statement that he âintentionally modeled the public health guidelines based on the Governorâs recommendations, never imagining he did not want his own guidelines followed.â San Antonio City Attorney Andy Segovia said the attorney general’s letter labors to “construe inconsistencies where there are none” and “undermines the language of the Governorâs order that allows local officials to facilitate implementation and enforcement.”
Adler said, âUp to this point, we have avoided the naked politicization of the virus crisis. I will not follow the AG down that road.â
The letters also took issue with local restrictions on religious services. State officials have allowed churches, synagogues, mosques and other houses of worship to stay open provided they follow certain guidelines. Local restrictions on Austinâs Travis County went further by stating, for example, that services âshouldâ be provided remotely and any in-person staffing should be limited to no more than 10 people in the room.
The Austin letter also took issue with a local policy that bars religious institutions from discrimination based on sexual orientation in the hiring process.
This story originally appeared on the Texas Tribune. To read this article in its original format, click here.