MrMarc

Either make the rule and enforce it, or get rid of the rule. I am a rule follower, but far too many people are not. I get really tired of rules only to those of us who are willing to follow it. It should not matter what anyone thinks about masks. If the rule is you have to wear them, then make everyone wear them. From my experience, I know if I took mine off for five seconds someone would appear to make me put it back on, that's just the way things work for me and possibly why I'm a rule follower.

I'm wondering if it will continue on a dual track in both the Appellate and Trial Court. Since it is over a preliminary injunction, I'm not sure it would be worth it, depending on how fast the trial can move along. That would be really interesting to see if the Appellate Courts dealt with the injunction issue differently than a final injunction. Personally, I think it would be a waste of time and resources at this point, just work on the trial to get a final decision that will immediately be appealed. But then again, I was one of those that thought Florida did not have a chance of winning, and I absolutely was shocked by the Appellate Courts reversal of itself, so my track record is not too good inthis case.

Thank you for the links. I had one done at my Doctor's office with a blood draw. I had thought it was the more complex test, but apparently it was only the IgG Chemiluminescence Immunoassay, I had thought it was the IgG and IgM test. So maybe I have only IgM cells. So I am fairly confidant at this point that I am just one of those people who's system is basically waiting to create the anti-bodies until they are actually needed. Although, since the J&J is a vector vaccine, I had hoped for a strong reaction. I have read the studies and understand the concept of the mrna residing in the T-Cells and lymph nodes. It has also been reassuring to see the latest reports on lymph node retention of immunity, so if I do have immunity I can expect it to last longer than they initially though. But n any event, I feel like I have a belt and suspenders.

I am so sorry about your sister, but I am glad she is ok. The vaccines are not 100% effective (no vaccine is), but possibly it moderated the COvid enough to have given her time to make it to help. I already have 4 stents, which is one of the reasons I am so invested in taking precautions and getting the vaccine. I am afraid that the vaccines may be ineffective on me. I had both Moderna doses, with only minor reactions. Then I took both types of antibody test, both were negative. A week ago I got the J&J vaccine, and again, almost no reaction whatsoever. So at this point I have no idea whether or not I have any immunity, and I am not going to test again, I've done everything I can. Now, to a great extent my fate is determined by what people around me do, and too many of them just don't care. I am going on a cruise in September (at least at this point) and will go as a vaccinated person. Whatever happens, happens. I will assume it is as the vaccine studies have shown, that my immunity is just sitting in my T-cells, waiting until the antibodies are needed.

That is an amazingly well written and reasoned description of the situation and how to approach it. I am not in the medical field at all, but based on reported experience from people around me, I would add that even though your chances of recovery if you are vaccinated are pretty much 100%, the experience itself can be very bad, a lot worse than the flu or it could be totally inconsequential, but there is currently no accurate way to predict what your experience will be.

Just a little poke in the ribs to remind the cruise industry that they will still have to deal with the CDC no matter how any court rules. It also may be an attempt to get the cruise lines to side with the CDC in the suit, trying to make a State win bad for the cruise lines.

I wouldn't tell a Federal Judge he had a little one. It sounds like contempt of court.

I honestly have no idea. Truthfully I am totally baffled by this. I never practiced at this level, and it's been a long time. However it seems very strange to me. Courts don't like being overruled, but I never had one overrule itself this way. This feels more like politics than law to me.

not necessarily. I missed that footnote and you are correct. It is not available pursuant to the RUles of the Appelate Court.: 11th Cir. R. 35-4 Matters Not Considered En Banc. A petition for rehearing en banc tendered with respect to any of the following orders will not be considered by the court en banc, but will be referred as a motion for reconsideration to the judge or panel that entered the order sought to be reheard: (a) Administrative or interim orders, including but not limited to orders ruling on requests for the following relief: stay or injunction pending appeal; appointment of counsel; leave to appeal in forma pauperis; and, permission to appeal when an appeal is within the court’s discretion.

After looking at the Court of Appeals Docket sheet, to me it seems that Florida's brief changed their minds. However, I find it strange that the decision was made with no hearing or even scheduling for briefs or responses. This had to come as a gut shot to the CDC attorneys and the cruise lines. At this point I would guess that what they really want is consistency and predictability, no matter what the particular rules were. Right now they have neither. Now unvaccinated passengers will be mad if they don't change the protocols, and vaccinated passengers will be mad if they do. To me this seems more harmful to the industry than the CSO ever was or would have been.

By the way, thank you to everyone posting the links to the actual documents, that gives a much clearer picture of what is going on than any news story.

Now the CDC will file an appeal to The Supreme Court or to the full 11th Court of Appeals (en banc). So it is like a chess-tennis mash up. Except no one really knows who will make the next move or who will the ball next.

No, she was actually really nice, and very honest. I don't remember why she was on the ship or how the conversation started. I do remember I felt like I had put my foot down my throat when, after I had been talking about it, she told me who she was. She was not happy with the way they made them roll it out. She actually seemed really intelligent, but my impression is she did not have the resources or control that she would have wanted to have. The bottle of wine sent to my room from her convinced me she was who she claimed to be.

I just remembered, a few years ago, if anyone remembers the truly disastrous roll out of the new app when pretty much everything disappered and was messed up for a couple of months. I was talking to a crew member, and it turne out she was either in charge or high up in the team that was responsible for it. They had wanted more beta testing and to pull it when they found so many errors with it, but they were told they could not and had to repair it in place. I used to be in IT and was expressing sympathy with her and her team. She sent a bottle of wine to my room.

Nothing against anyone that works for them, Has anything with Royal IT ever worked consistently? I have never understood how a company that depends so heavily on technology for almost every aspect of it's focus could have an IT department that is, well, like it is.