The Debate on School Mask Mandates in America

Mask mandates were implemented as children prepared to return to school in the fall of 2021. The mandate requires all students to be masked for the duration of the school day to prevent the spread of COVID among the school community. Parents across the country reacted angrily to these measures, voicing their displeasure in school board meetings. Media outlets covered school board meetings, highlighting the rising tensions in the country over the debate over mask mandates in schools. According to a poll from Forbes only 28% of parents oppose the mandate while 52% support it. (Allison Durkee) Though the minority claims that their children’s constitutional rights have been violated resound loudly across the country. Despite these claims the mask mandate is just and is vital to the safety of in person learning.

The minority opposition claims that the mask mandate has psychological effects on children. Facial expressions are an essential part of nonverbal communication which hinders the ability for children to communicate with peers and teachers. (Neeraj Sood) In addition to non-verbal communication, verbal communication is hampered by the muffled sound caused by the mask. They argue that for children in their prime years of childhood, these restrictions will severely limit their future communication skills. Though this point does indeed make sense it assumes psychological harm to communication skills as a fact despite the lack of evidence to support it. However, without masks, in-person learning is not possible at this stage. Remote learning, on the other hand, effectively isolates children from their peers by eliminating all forms of authentic human interaction. In fact, the negative impacts of closing schools are both backed by evidence. Besides education, schools also provide non-academic needs such as food and medical services. According to an article in the World Medical and Health Policy Journal, in 2017 more than 17 percent of all the children in the US lived in food insecure homes and more than 75 percent of public-school students in 2016 were eligible for free lunch at school. (Hoffman 302) Families now must rely more on schools to provide necessities such as food, childcare, and medical care, especially during these difficult times. Given the dangers of the COVID virus, in-person learning can only resume once mask mandates are implemented. How can we weigh the psychological effects of masks against the risk of students going hungry? Clearly, the advantages of in-person learning outweigh the risks of masking in schools.

Furthermore, the opposition claims that the mask mandate violates their first amendment freedom of choice. This stance on masks extends beyond the classroom, as evidenced by numerous lawsuits filed by citizens. In Michigan, for example, several parents at the Resurrection School filed a lawsuit alleging that the mask mandate violated their constitutional and first amendment rights. (David Hudson) The court concluded that since the law was neutral the state only needs a legitimate reason to enforce a mask mandate. Which their reasoning that it is in the state’s interest to control the spread of COVID-19 in Michigan is accepted. It isn’t far-fetched to believe argue of the infringement of right however especially in these times the mandate is justified as it is employed in the interest of the people. The first amendment to the United States Constitution protects our right to freedom of religion, speech, and assembly from government interference, which theoretically gives people the right to choose whether or not to wear a mask. Since the Constitution makes no explicit mention of masks, they cannot be declared unconstitutional. In contrast, mask mandates are made constitutional by the 10th amendment which states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people”. (Daniel Karon) In other words, it gives the state the authority to enact and enforce laws for the benefit of its citizens. In this case, the mask mandate is deemed a necessary provision for the safety of all citizens, including school-aged children. The Supreme Court’s purpose is to evaluate claims of alleged unconstitutional acts through a more current lens, all while keeping our founding fathers’ intentions in mind. To accomplish this, they have long held the “police power law,” which grants states the authority to regulate behavior and enforce order for the benefit of their citizens. (Daniel Karon) This “police power law,” similar to the states’ power stated in the 10th amendment, demonstrates that states are well within their rights to enforce mask mandates, and those who refuse are seen to be breaking the rules. Therefore, mask mandates are not an infringement of our first amendment right.

On the same note, when people’s lives are at stake, we must take a utilitarian approach to the situation. Masks have been shown to be effective at reducing the risk of COVID transmission, particularly in the school setting. The CDC cites three different studies that compared the number of covid cases between mandate and no mandate in a recent press release. According to one study, schools in Arizona that did not have a mandate were 3.5 times more likely to have an outbreak than schools that did. Among schools the numbers show that masking policies leads to lower infection rates. In this moral dilemma, the public’s safety would take precedence over any potential psychological consequences or violations of rights. Another study found that countries with no mask mandate averaged 34.85 compared to 16.32 cases in countries with a mandate. (“Studies Show More COVID-19”) Clearly, schools with a mask mandate in place fare better than those without. Given the circumstances of the virus and the risk to human life, the question of the mandate’s morality is moot. From the standpoint of a utilitarian, the choice that results in the best outcome for the majority takes precedence over the sake of others. In this moral dilemma, the public’s safety would take precedence over any potential psychological consequences or violations of rights. Overall, the mask mandate is justified because it seeks to protect the lives of the public. Despite complaints about the mask mandate, a utilitarian would choose it because it is both the proven and accepted method of protecting against COVID-19.

Mask mandates must be implemented in schools for our children’s safety and to provide a healthy learning environment. If mask mandates are made illegal, students will be forced to return to remote learning, which will pose both mental and financial challenges. It is our responsibility as citizens to abide by the rules and regulations put in place to ensure the safety of society. Mask mandates are unquestionably legal and justified under the 10th Amendment and Supreme Court-approved “police power law.” It is critical that these mandates be viewed through a public safety lens rather than a political one.

Bibliography
Durkee, Allison. Majority of Americans- But Fewer Parents- Support School Mask Mandates

and Vaccine Requirements, Poll Finds. Forbes, 23 Aug. 2021,https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/08/23/majority-of-americans-but-fewer-parents- support-school-mask-mandates-and-vaccine-requirements-poll-finds/?sh=3549ad7238cf. Accessed 7 November 2021.

Hoffman, Jessica. “Addressing the Consequences of School Closure due to COVID-19 on Children’s Physical and Mental Well-Being.” World Medical and Health Policy, https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.365. Accessed 7 November 2021.

Hudson, David. “Free-exercise challenge to Mich. school mask mandate fails in 6th Circuit.”

First Amendment News and Insights from MTSU, https://www.mtsu.edu/first- amendment/post/2170/free-exercise-challenge-to-mich-school-mask-mandate-fails-in-6th-circuit. Accessed 8 November 2021.

Sood, Neeraj. “Mandatory Masking of School Children is a Bad Idea.” USC Schaeffer,https://healthpolicy.usc.edu/article/mandatory-masking-of-school-children-is-a-bad-idea/. Accessed 7 November 2021.

Karon, Daniel. “To Mask Or Not To Mask? It’s not a Constitutional Question.” Columbia Law School’s Blog on Corporations and Capital Markets, https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2020/10/29/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-its-not-a-constitutional- question/. Accessed 7 November 2021.

“Studies Show More COVID-19 Cases in Areas Without School Masking Policies.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0924- school-masking.html. Accessed November 7 2021.