Is it constitutionally permissible for a local school board to implement CDC health recommendations as mandatory rules using federal funding conditions when such rules may exceed state law authority?

QUESTION PRESENTED In Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997), this Court held unconstitutional a federal law obligating State officials to implement a federal regulatory scheme. The Printz Court noted that Congress had begun to enact statutes which indirectly required the participation of State or local officials in implementing federal regulatory schemes as a condition of federal funding grants, and noted that these schemes should be addressed “if and when their validity is challenged in a proper case.” Id., at 917-918. Petitioners were convicted in a State court due to an alleged failure to obey a local school face mask regulation promulgated in violation of State law and solely on the “authority” of the American Rescue Plan Act, which ultimately conditioned the use of COVID-19 funds upon local schools’ implementation of CDC recommendations. QUESTION: Where the power to regulate public health is reserved by the Tenth Amendment to the States, is it lawful for a local school board to make public health rules otherwise outside of State law, and solely pursuant to a federal regulation requiring CDC recommendations to be made mandatory rules by those boards receiving federal funds?