(The Center Square) — Gov. Jeff Landry’s executive order moving $168 million in the state’s school funding formula is in a sort of legal limbo after a judge blocked the order from being implemented.

The temporary restraining order, issued by a Baton Rouge judge last week, halted Landry’s plan to reduce the Minimum Foundation Program by $168 million and redirect the money toward one-time stipends for teachers and school support staff.

For Landry’s executive order to take effect, it needed approval from two-thirds of the Legislature. Lawmakers’ votes were due Tuesday at 5PM, but it appears they will not be counted until the court decides whether to keep the injunction in place. A hearing is scheduled for June 29.

When asked to comment on the status of the votes and how many had been cast, the legislature’s communications team said that they were “not able”, likely because of the lawsuit.

The Governor’s office also couldn’t speak on the matter.

“We aren’t in charge of voting and we didn’t set a deadline. The legislature controls their process, the legislature sends out the ballots,” a spokesperson for Landry said.

The order would have funded $2,000 payments for classroom teachers and $1,000 payments for support workers, plus associated retirement costs. But the lawsuit challenging the move argues the governor cannot unilaterally reduce the MFP and then decide where the money goes next.

At the center of the dispute is not whether teachers should receive extra pay, but who has the constitutional authority to move the money.

The court found the plaintiffs had made an initial showing that the executive order may violate the separation of powers by taking over a funding decision reserved for the Legislature. The restraining order also questioned whether the governor’s limited authority to reduce an MFP appropriation allows him to redirect the money to a separate purpose of his choosing.

Landry signed the executive order June 2 after voters rejected a permanent funding source for the stipends through constitutional amendment.

The administration framed the order as a way to keep money flowing directly to educators without raising taxes or increasing the overall education budget. But critics argue the maneuver would cut operational funding from districts first, then return only part of that money to certain employees.

The reduction would have averaged about 5% of state aid to districts. Some categories of school employees, including counselors, nurses, principals, assistant principals and some administrators, were not included in the stipend plan.