Pennsylvania can restore pandemic restrictions on indoor and outdoor gatherings, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, putting on hold a judge’s ruling that threw out statewide limits on crowd size and other measures meant to limit the spread of the coronavirus.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling means the administration of Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, may once again enforce size limits on gatherings while it appeals the lower court ruling, including on the number of spectators permitted at school sporting events.

The state immediately reimposed its gathering limit of more than 25 people for events held indoors and more than 250 people for those held outside, though a Wolf spokersperson said that “additional details on indoor and outdoor gatherings will be released next week.”

Wolf himself hinted that changes might be forthcoming.

“We have to be careful about how we gather together, and I think that’s the important thing. At the same time, we’ve got to make sure that we’re being reasonable, realistic about how we do things,” said Wolf, speaking after the appeals court issued its ruling. “We’ll continue to look to make sure the guidelines we have in place are reasonable.”

U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV in Pittsburgh, an appointee of President Donald Trump, had ruled against the state’s size limits on indoor and outdoor gatherings, saying they violate citizens’ constitutional rights to assemble.

“You had to know that was coming,” state Rep. Lou Schmitt, R-Altoona, said of the 3rd Circuit ruling that stays the District Court’s dismissal of Wolf’s restrictions. The court likely decided to err on the side of safety, according to Schmitt.

Better to be wrong with an order that has the potential to save lives, than to do the opposite, the court likely thought, according to Schmitt. “If I were a judge, that’s the side I would err on.” he said.

Stickman’s Sept. 14 ruling prompted many Pennsylvania school districts to allow more fans in the stands at high school football games and other athletic contests. Wolf said he’s working with school districts “to do what we can to recognize the contexts that are different in every community.”

“Stay tuned,” the governor added. “We’re working on it as we speak.”

The Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association, the governing body for school sports, said in a written statement that “we are hopeful that there may be some modifications to the restrictions.” But the PIAA added that as a result of the ruling, and without further action from Wolf, it’s telling member schools that the statewide spectator limits of 25 for indoor games and 250 for outdoor games are back in effect, including for playoffs.

Schools began telling parents about the reinstated spectator limits, scuttling Friday night football crowds, eliminating attendance at girls’ volleyball games and provoking disappointment and outrage on social media.

The 3rd Circuit stay is likely to remain in place until the court makes a final decision, absent a “compelling” reason to lift it earlier, Schmitt indicated.

He doesn’t expect the decision on the heavily politicized issue of gubernatorial emergency powers to be politically charged.

“These judges are a heartbeat away from the (U.S.) Supreme Court,” Schmitt said. “They’ll strive to get it right.”

The office of Attorney General Josh Shapiro asked the Philadelphia-based appeals court to intervene in the case after Stickman declined to stay his own order. Shapiro’s office said crowd-size limits and other statewide public health orders are “life-saving mitigation tools” against the virus, and warned that “eliminating the congregate limits during the pendency of this appeal will result in people’s deaths.”

More than 160,000 people in Pennsylvania have contracted the virus since the beginning of the pandemic, and more than 8,100 deaths have been attributed to COVID-19, according to state health officials. After falling in August, infections have been trending back up in Pennsylvania as students head back to K-12 schools and colleges, according to the COVID Tracking Project.

Stickman’s ruling also invalidated key parts of the Wolf administration’s early pandemic response, including his orders requiring people to stay at home and shuttering thousands of businesses deemed “non-life-sustaining.” Wolf had since eased many of the restrictions the plaintiffs objected to in their lawsuit, and he said he has no plans to reinstate them.

Other state and federal courts have rejected various challenges to Wolf’s authority to impose public health orders in response to the pandemic.

But Stickman sided with plaintiffs that included hair salons, drive-in movie theaters, a farmers market vendor, a horse trainer and several Republican officeholders in ruling that Wolf’s policies were overreaching, arbitrary and violated citizens’ constitutional rights.

The three-judge appeals panel that put Stickman’s ruling on hold include two judges appointed by President George W. Bush, a Republican, and one appointed by President Barack Obama, a Democrat.

“We are disappointed but undeterred,” said attorney Thomas W. King III, who represents the plaintiffs.

The 3rd Circuit’s ultimate ruling could help set national precedent, according to Schmitt.

It could do so because it could be among differing regional decisions on the emergency powers of governors — and how long they can be sustained — which could prompt the Supreme Court to resolve those differences, Schmitt indicated.