Haney v. Pritzker

• Decision Date: 27 September 2021
• Docket Number: Case No. 20 C 3653
• Parties: Karen HANEY, in her capacity as John McDonald's guardian, Plaintiff, v. Governor J.B. PRITZKER, in his official capacity as Governor of Illinois, and Grace B. Hou, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Illinois Department of Human Services, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

563 F.Supp.3d 840

Karen HANEY, in her capacity as John McDonald's guardian, Plaintiff,

v.Governor J.B. PRITZKER, in his official capacity as Governor of Illinois, and Grace B. Hou, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Illinois Department of Human Services, Defendants.

Case No. 20 C 3653

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division.

Signed September 27, 2021

Mary M. Weeks, Pro Hac Vice, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Atlanta, GA, Blake T. Hannafan, Hannafan & Hannafan, Ltd., Sean Thomas Herbert Dutton, Misha Tseytlin, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.

Amanda Leigh Kozar, Mary Alice Johnston, Office of the Illinois Attorney General, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

REBECCA R. PALLMEYER, United States District Judge This case arises out of restrictions imposed by Governor J.B. Pritzker on various state programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. John McDonald, a developmentally disabled Illinois citizen, filed this action on June 23, 2020, challenging the pandemic-related closure of all Community Day Services ("CDS") programs that the State makes available to persons with developmental disabilities. Specifically, he alleged that Defendants Pritzker and Grace B. Hou—the Secretary of the Illinois Department of Human Services—discriminated against him because of his disabilities by keeping CDS programs temporarily closed while permitting allegedly comparable businesses, programs, and activities to reopen. Among other things, McDonald sought a temporary restraining order prohibiting Defendants from keeping CDS programs (including the program he attended) closed. He also requested a declaratory judgment that the challenged conduct violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. After the parties reached a voluntary agreement that permitted McDonald to return to his CDS program in early July 2020, the court terminated McDonald's motion for emergency injunctive relief without prejudice.

Months later, a state court declared McDonald incompetent and appointed McDonald's sister and caretaker, Karen Haney, as his legal guardian. (See Second Karen Haney Decl. [57]; Nov. 2020 State Court Order [57-1].) This court then granted Haney's motion to substitute as Plaintiff under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(b). (Order [58].)¹ Before the court is Defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). As explained here, Defendants’ motion is denied.

BACKGROUND

A. Community Day Services Programs

The Illinois Department of Human Services ("IDHS") regulates and administers CDS programs for intellectually and developmentally disabled adults in Illinois. (Compl. [1] ¶¶ 2, 27.) Both the State and IDHS receive federal funding for assistance with those programs. (Id. ¶ 27.) CDS programs offer disabled adults "assistance in gaining and improving self-help, socialization, and adaptive skills in a non-residential setting, with a particular emphasis on training in quantitative skills and enhancement of productive work activities." (Id. ¶ 25.) They also offer disabled adults "opportunities to work both in the community and at the CDS program's building," and in so doing "provid[e] many [program] participants with their only opportunities to hold a job and earn income." (Id. ¶ 26.)

The Community Workshop and Training Center, Inc. ("CWTC") is a CDS program in Peoria, Illinois. (Id. ¶¶ 9, 38.) It has "long-term contracts with essential private firms" and "employ[s] roughly 170 disabled workers to process and package products for these companies." (Id. ¶ 40.) CWTC provides "attendant care and supervision" for disabled workers while they are on the job. (Id. ¶ 39.) It also provides "community programming" for them, "such as an art show, annual awards dinner, and more." (Id. ¶ 43.) Plaintiff alleges that participation in the CWTC program affords "personal satisfaction and a sense of purpose" to disabled persons. (Id. )

McDonald is unable to hear or see, and communicates "primarily with sign language." (See id. ¶ 9.) His intellectual and developmental disabilities "leav[e] him with the intellectual capacity of a 7-year-old." (Id. ¶ 36.) Before the COVID-19 pandemic, McDonald attended CWTC's program on weekdays for more than 20 years. (Id. ¶ 38.) He worked there, "packaging construction hardware like nuts and bolts for a large manufacturing company." (Id. ¶ 39.)

B. The COVID-19 Pandemic

In early March 2020, public health officials noted concerns about the spread of the COVID-19 virus in Illinois. (Id. ¶ 16.) Defendant Pritzker declared a statewide emergency on March 9, 2020. (Id. ¶ 17.) To halt the spread of the virus, Defendant Pritzker issued a series of orders that prohibited public gatherings, closed all bars and restaurants to in-person dining, closed schools and non-essential businesses, and entered a statewide stay-at-home order for all people who were not performing essential functions. (Id. ¶¶ 18–19.) Consistent with those orders, on March 17, 2020, IDHS closed CDS programs statewide. (See id. ¶ 28 (alleging that the "shutter[ing]" of those programs "barred [the] disabled workers from returning to work or receiving services from such programs").)

On May 5, 2020, when the number of COVID-19 transmissions was still climbing but the rate of new infections over time had started to slow (or "flatten"), Defendant Pritzker announced a plan to reopen the State in five phases (the "Restore Illinois" plan). (Id. ¶ 20.) Under the plan, each of four Illinois regions could "return to non-essential business and other normal operations once they met certain thresholds." (Id. ) The first threshold was a "flattening" of the rate of new transmissions; thus, in the same week that Defendant Pritzker announced the plan, all of Illinois entered Phase 2. (Id. ¶ 21.) In Phase 2, hospitals could conduct certain elective surgeries; "non-essential retail [could] re-open for phone and online orders, as well as pick-up and deliveries"; some state parks could re-open with "strict social distancing"; and individuals were required to wear face coverings in public if they could not maintain a six-foot distance from others.² Illinois entered Phase 3 of the plan on June 3, 2020, when the rates of new infections, hospitalizations, and filled intensive care unit beds were in decline. (Id. ¶ 22.)³ In Phase 3, Defendants permitted "non-essential manufacturing and non-essential businesses" to reopen, provided that their employees practiced social distancing and followed safety guidance approved by the Illinois Department of Public Health—such as wearing personal protective equipment and using "adequate sanitation practices." (Id. ¶¶ 3, 22.) Likewise, Defendants permitted recreational day camps for children and limited child-care services to reopen, "consistent with approved safety guidance and sanitation procedures." (Id. ¶ 22.) Defendants did not permit CDS programs to reopen, however. (See, e.g. , id. ¶ 31.)

On June 4, 2020, Defendant Pritzker announced that "all public and private schools serving pre-kindergarten through 12th grade in the State could open for summer school, following the completion of the regular 2019–2020 school year." (Id. ¶ 24.) By contrast, on June 9, 2020, IDHS issued a "guidance letter to CDS providers stating that the prohibition of CDS program operations" would "extend until at least August 31, 2020, to be consistent with the Illinois Department of Aging and their decision to keep Adult Day Sites closed through August 31." (Id. ¶ 32 (internal quotation marks omitted).)

Progress continued, and Illinois was on track to enter Phase 4 around June 26, 2020. (See id. ¶ 23.) Phase 4 contemplated allowing "all manufacturing, non-essential businesses, outdoor recreation, bars, restaurants, health and fitness clubs, and movie theaters" to reopen "with approved safety guidance." (Id. ) It also contemplated permitting public gatherings of up to 50 people to resume, and permitting "all schools, institutes of higher education, summer programs, and child-care services" to reopen "with approved safety guidance." (Id. ) But Phase 4 did not contemplate reopening CDS programs. (See, e.g., id. ¶ 31.)

According to Plaintiff, CWTC's contracts with manufacturing businesses made it an "essential business" under Defendant Pritzker's executive orders, meaning that CWTC "continued providing its packaging services" throughout the pandemic-related shutdown. (Id. ¶ 41.) During that time, Plaintiff alleges, CWTC's "non-disabled employees" completed the work that disabled persons such as McDonald had been doing before the shutdown. (Id. ) Plaintiff has not alleged that Defendants played any role in permitting CWTC's non-disabled employees to complete that work, but she does assert that Defendants permitted non-disabled employees of CDS programs (presumably including CWTC) to complete tasks "previously assigned to the disabled workers" and used federal funds to pay the CDS program employees for that work. (Id. ¶¶ 30, 55.)

Plaintiff alleges that many disabled persons, including McDonald, "are fully capable of following basic sanitation requirements, such as handwashing and mask-wearing, and have no underlying medical conditions that make them particularly susceptible to COVID-19." (Id. ¶ 57.) Quoting an April 2020 publication from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Plaintiff alleges that intellectually and developmentally disabled persons "are not inherently at higher risk for becoming infected with or having severe illness from COVID-19." (Id. ¶ 19.)⁴ And she alleges that there is no reason why CDS programs could not have "follow[ed] the same public-health guidelines required of the manufacturing businesses, non-overnight day camps, and child-care services" that Defendants reopened before CDS programs. (Id. ¶ 31; see also id. ¶ 44.)

On ...