JeffB

I have no details but I will find the suit and read it. I just posted in another thread I was hoping someone would try. You have to love Desantis!

Not shocked either. We're 5d into the flurry of hits on the CDC/HHS CSO from interested parties. The response from the CDC is to shrug their shoulders and announce, "cruise ships will sail from US ports by mid-summer." Pretty useless because it's missing a path forward other than some specifics on the technicals that the CDC released under pressure but no dates or timelines were provided. A couple of COVID related points: The reality of what's happening in countries that had the resources to lock in vaccine orders and are moving forward in an accelerated way to vaccinate adults - steeply declining deaths and hospitalizations - contradicts most global health authorities negative COVID messaging, including the CDC's. Yes, new cases have increased after dropping steeply as vaccines were introduced then plateauing at what the CDC claims is too high of a number. While new C-19 case numbers have been a continual if not misleading metric when taken out of context it is much less relevant in a circumstance where vaccines are becoming widely available. There are better metrics available but those appear to not being considered as indicators of the need to revise or ease the general approach to SARS2 transmission and COVID mitigation measures. Interestingly, more than 50% of new case numbers are in 5 states, FL is one of them. IOW, these are regional outbreaks that should be treated as such with appropriate focus on controlling them. Instead, we get a one size fits all approach as measured by rising case numbers. In the US, the lack of a strategy or milestones articulated by federal public health and infectious disease officials and general guidance to get businesses and people safely back to a post-COVID normalcy is shockingly shortsighted. Meanwhile, Broward Co. the home of PEV, has developed a set of reasonable milestones using appropriate COVID metrics for easing mitigation measures in 3 phases. These are consistent with the phased reopening plan that Governor Desantis signed off on last June. They make sense. If you're interested you can read it here: https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/broward-commissioners-vote-to-relax-some-covid-19-restrictions/2422564/ At this point, I have little hope for a revision of the CSO by HHS/CDC in the next 9 days. I set a wait and see date of April 15th, 2w after the CDC's release of technicals, to see if there was any movement. It still could happen but we've lost some momentum and in 9 more days, no one will be interested having moved on to more pressing matters, the CDC having dodge a bullet thay should have taken center mass. I'd really like to see a federal court filing asking for an injunction directed against DHS's enforcement of the NSO. Probably hard to do but I wish someone would try. I want to see the US Justice Department try to defend what's in the CSO and the technicals released last week.

I posted this as a part of a longer post on why I think the cruise lines, financially, are at a tipping point. I believe they see their survival as viable entities imperiled. They are sitting on billions of dollars of unproductive capital assets, a payroll and mounting debt that they have taken on to sustain themselves or restructured to delay repayments. Think about the billions the lines invested in new ship building the 6-12 months prior to the pandemic that shut cruise ship operations down. Corporate is starting to play hardball ...... Walenski's and Becerra's phones were probably ringing off the hook today. There's pressure from Congressmen, governors and corporate leadership. The result was this milk toast press release, not much more than a regurgitation of the phased approach contained in the CSO, from a CDC spokesperson: “CDC is committed to working with the cruise industry and seaport partners to resume cruising following the phased approach outlined in the conditional sailing order,” CDC spokeswoman Jade Fulce said in a response to questions about Carnival. “This goal aligns with the desire to resume passenger operations in the United States expressed by many major cruise ship operators and travelers; hopefully, by mid-summer with restricted revenue sailings.” Hopefully, this is the start of changes to be forthcoming. My take is that there will be more movement on the part of HHS and the CDC. There has to be. What the CDC is holding on to is just not defensible any longer, the cruise line execs are smelling blood in the water. I predict some kind of face saving modifications to the CSO that will tend to make the CDC and HHS look and feel good about themselves. The introduction of vaccines - the recognition of their impact on virus transmission and disease burden - will be a big part of those mods. There won't be any vaccine mandates from HHS to restart cruising. That is for sure. These contracts that the CDC has mandated between cruise lines, ports and nearby health care facilities will probably disappear and be replaced by agreements rather than legally enforceable contracts - those are hard. IVO of voluntary vaccine requirements implemented by the cruise lines, some virus metric thresholds might be relaxed. Port employees and guest relations staff may only be required to mask and maintain distance not all be vaccinated. I can see lot of changes to the nitty gritty of the CSO that makes things infinitely easier for ports and cruise lines to restart operations. These don't need to be publicly flouted by anyone with the intent of making the CDC look bad. The lines know exactly what is at stake here if some leeway is granted and things get screwed up with an outbreak onboard or precipitated by virus spread in a port and surrounding local community. They have every incentive to seriously make embarkation, voyages, port calls and debarkation as safe as they all can be from outbreaks. The CDC should recognize that paternalistic COVID mitigation mandates are not necessary with a huge incentive for good corporate behavior from the cruise lines.

And while we're on the subject of vaccination passports, the US government can do whatever it wants with this idea. That is not going to stop other governments from imposing the requirement for proof of vaccination to enter their countries. Nothing new here and that has been discussed. Right now, this is a fast moving ball game. So far in Europe, from my vantage point, the EUC hasn't come out saying vaccine passports are going to be required to travel between EU countries. This is a very sticky subject right now. Personally I want to resume traveling to and within Europe. I'd feel much better about doing that with most airlines and cruise lines seemingly moving towards requiring vaccinations anyway, that those I'm coming in contact with in airports, cruise terminals and other public spaces that most are vaccinated. IOW, I'm subrogating my concerns over the potential vulnerability of my health information to my wish to travel.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT REQURE COVID-19 VACCINE PASSPORTS. That's the headline and its going to spark numerous questions. Can a private entity require proof of vaccination or negative COVID test to enter their premises? Yes, according to Fauci when asked and depending on how states deal with this. The bottom line for cruising is that cruise lines can and very likely will require proof of vaccination AND negative COVID tests (probably PCR) to board. Full stop. For private entities that do require proof of vaccination, get ready for heaps of complaining, cries of unfairness and claims that there are now two classes of American citizens. You've heard a lot of this before when it came to mask mandates. Desantis has already issued an EO to prevent businesses operating in FL under FL business licenses from mandating vaccines to receive services offered. That WILL NOT affect cruise ships - already discussed. I'm not going to get into the pros and cons of this. Just a heads up that we're going to see a battle royal between those that think people should be vaccinated to do stuff and those that don't.

Two thoughts on where we are with this: The cruise lines are getting more aggressive with their press releases. I would speculate that this is recognition that they will reach a dire state financially with out a restart, starting out small and quickly advancing to a broad based re-start, of cruises from US ports. Cruise lines cannot sustain themselves with the limited restarts they've embarked upon. The lines are not going to sit idly buy and watch the US government destroy several multi-billion dollar enterprises. For the lines to remain with their heads above water, I'd say that has to happen by the end of June beginning of July. I'll buy a round of June cancelations but that's it. A full 15 months without revenue and no bailouts is not sustainable. Restructuring debt and issuing notes to raise cash can only go so far. We're getting to a tipping point. If there's no adjustments made by the CDC within the next couple of weeks, I'm pretty sure we'll see legal action. I'd also speculate that signals are being sent to that end to various members of Congress, HHS/CDC as well as overtures being made to supportive state governments. I'm a bit hopeful ..... but then again we've all been brought to that level on at least three occasions I can recall with those hopes dashed.

I'm with smokeybandit. When a complaint like this that seeks relief is filed in a federal court, the presiding judge reviews it to make sure he has jurisdiction and the case has standing. If it meets those criteria, he'll issue the injunction pending a hearing. It's here where I made this point in another thread that I question whether the Justice Department is willing to defend the laugher that is the CSO. At this point the CSO is pretty hard to defend with the advent of vaccines and their undeniable positive impact on disease burden. If the pandemic were still raging here in the US - and it's not, this despite the CDC's view that it is, it might be defensible.

Yes, I could get something close to that cost out of Miami but after an 1 hour Uber ride from where we live to the port of Miami to fly with the most inconvenient times and connections, I wasn't willing. Of course I could book more reasonable non-stop routing ...... for neatly a grand pp.

We're talking about leverage here. For the cruise industry to get back to business, they have to have it. There are two options we seem to be framing here: (1) Let the court of public opinion and lobbied politicians be the leverage that moves HHS to tell the CDC to cancel the CSO. (2) Let the courts TELL DHS that they are enjoining the provisions of the CSO that denies cruise ship operations from US ports. I prefer the later. If it can be mounted, and I'm not sure it can be, a claim that the the provisions of the CSO are unconstitutional (violation of 14A) could be filed in short order and an injunction issued. That does not mean that the US Justice Department acting on behalf of HHS could not challenge the injunction but I'm also not certain that they would. Can you imagine even good government lawyers trying to argue in defense of the laugher that is the CSO?

Yes, but when is Biden going to tell his HHS Secretary to get with the program and can the out dated, burdensome and irrelevant (IVO vaccine success) CDC CSO?

Yeah, this is the thing. Posturing is fine and I definitely think it has its place here. But I'm with you. I don't think you can game the system right now. I've been tempted to cancel a July cruise out of Amsterdam with a Norway itinerary and book something more likely to sail. Europe is experiencing vaccine woes - I don't see the Netherlands welcoming international travelers and opening cruise ports by July. Could happen but low probability given the circumstances there. As well the Celebrity offerings out of St. Maarten are appealing ..... except for all the hoop jumping and high cost of air to SMX from Miami. Sure, I'm chomping at the bit to cruise. I actually think something is going to come of CLIA's hit piece, press release on the CDC along with DelRio's and Bailey's public statements. Then there is Desantis who has already thrown down the gauntlet with threats of legal action. HHS may back down as the heat gets turned up. What we get to know in the public domain is always just the tip of the iceberg regarding what's going on behind the scenes. I don't know that the involved parties from the offices of Governor Desantis', maybe Governor Abbott's from Texas and the cruise industry have the leverage they need outside of the courts applying it. Legal action in the form of injunctions have to be in the mix I would think. Gets popcorn.

I think it is going to take more than political pressure, more than public shaming to get HHS to back off. I think legal minds are going to have to come up with a constitutional challenge to the implications - a barrier to free trade under 14A of the US Constitution - and in an appropriate federal court, request an injunction to stop enforcement of the NSO by DHS. I think the CLIA press release today is a shot across the bow of HHS ..... we're coming. The intent is to threaten to get the HHS/CDC in a court room to argue why cruising is unsafe due to the risk of the spread of C-19 and then have opposing counsel shoot all their reasons for it down. If there is a threat of such action, I think it is unlikely Biden's Justice Department would be willing to defend the CDC's/HHS's position when it can so easily be proven by the available facts to be indefensible. We can only hope.

In March of 2020 we had the CDC's mask debacle. Following this, as we now know, principals within then president Trump's COVID advisory committee argued amongst each other to the point of failing to recommend reasonable COVID related public health policy, confusion about vaccines, now we have the CDC proclaiming that SARS2 is not transmitted via surfaces. Lay people, like me, who read the medical literature have known this for at least 3 months, maybe longer. Stunning. And yet, we still have this agency being the primary entity wrongly preventing free commerce within the cruise industry, such actions being based on completely outdated and erroneous assumptions about infection control aboard cruise ships and without regard for the impact of vaccines on the pandemic in general and upon SARS2 transmission among the vaccinated, specifically. I have looked at the legality, in a non-lawyer way, of the NSO and the CSO and posted here that under the declaration of a PHE, what the Department of Homeland Security is tasked with doing (the enforcement arm behind the NSO) was lawful. Today, I looked at 14A of the US Constitution that deals with the limitations of government restrictions to free commerce and trade. It is possible that the cruise industry could seek an injunction to prevent the enforcement of the NSO, in the evolving pandemic circumstances, as an unlawful barrier to free trade. As the impact of vaccines take hold globally and especially in the US, and in conjunction with the proven, entirely reasonable and doable, steps that the cruise industry has taken to mitigate the risk that cruise ship operations could be a substantial risk for the spread of C-19, the CDC's stand on this becomes more irrelevant and by extension the NSO irrelevant as well and possibly unlawful, legal action could have legs.

....... and CLIA agrees. I was glad to see that CLIA rather nicely said to the CDC screw the idiodic technicals you released on Friday.

???? The difference between a cruise ship and a restaurant is that when you go to a restaurant (or the other venues that are not in the CDC's definition of a congregate setting) its a time limited event of at most 6-8h in a park. You're not living there in the sense that it means sleeping over-night in those but you are on a cruise ship. I hate defending the CDC but I think it is important among cruise fans here to understand that there is rationale behind what the CDC is doing (see my comparison of infection control procedures in a hospital to those on a cruise ship - they are a PITA but they have an important purpose. Most of us here, including me think that the technicals released on Friday are not bounded by appropriate risk/benefit analysis. Matt is right. The CDC is seeing the cruise industry through the lens of March 2020. Things have changed. The CDC hasn't.

I'll weigh in here on masks although I'm just not hard over on these like some are and that's fine, not criticizing but, you did hit one nail on the head. The science is not yet certain that vaccines prevent transmission. The evidence is mixed but generally says, yes it does. It also says that there is not sufficient evidence that you cannot get re-infected after receiving the vaccine. Evidence does indicate that if you do get re infected, the viral load you will have is low making transmission much less likely. This is speculative at this point. Masks just add one more layer of mitigation measures that are proven to be effective and, yes, masks tend to mitigate all the uncertainty. There is no question, none, despite what you can find on social media or from quackery, that properly designed and fitted masks prevent transmission of viruses that transmit via airborne mode including SARS-2 - the right one's of course. That's another subject. In my onw case, I've gotten so used to putting them on when I enter a venue that requires them, I don't mind anymore. It's become habit. I have to admit, I have a set of masks in my man-bag that aren't exactly the best but they are comfortable and easy to get off and on. Virtue signaling? Probably. OTH, I am scrupulous about wearing a properly fitting surgical mask in airports and on airplanes and that will continue even as the pandemic fades.

I'm not following Navigator's planned itinerary's out of LA. As a FL resident, flying to LA to take a west coast cruise isn't something I'd probably do, well, maybe. But I think the confusion is reflective of RCL struggling with negotiating port operations in the circumstances the CDC has created for them. With them, noting has been certain. It has to be terribly frustrating. Then, lets say senior people within RCL have a plan and it's being executed on a day to day basis with the usual hic-ups that occur with any plan. There was a joke when I was on active duty in the USMC, a very old, long standing joke, that involved command level decisions about what camoflage cover you'd put on your helmet. "Brown side or Green side." Once a decision was made and worked its way down the chain of command, it would get changed 10X at various levels. By the time it got to the troops, it was 30minutes before the parade was scheduled and, invariably, there was a ridiculous mix of camoflage covers among Marines who are singularly identifiable by their uniformity. I would not doubt that is exactly what is going on here with Navigators launch from LA and is behind the uncertainty and confusion.

Let's be clear. Here is how the CDC defines shared (also known as congregate) housing: ......shared housing includes a broad range of settings, such as apartments, condominiums, student or faculty housing, national and state park staff housing, transitional housing, and domestic violence and abuse shelters. Special considerations exist for the prevention of COVID-19 in shared housing situations .... I'd say a cruise ship at sea for an extended period of time where people congregate, sleep and eat constitutes a shared housing or congregate setting. Disney parks, airline travel, concerts and sporting events don't fall within CDC's definition of congregate settings. So, there's guidance for these places - a ton of it in normal times and 5 tons of it for the current pandemic times . It is very likely that all the CDC had to do was cut and paste some of verbiage that's been on the books for infection control in congregate settings that heretofore didn't include cruise ships. They do now. Then they added MORE. Look, I get this. Would you pillory the CDC for infection control that applies to a hospital? Surgery suites? Isolation wards? I've seen this stuff. It is immensely complicated and vitally important to stop the spread of infections in a hospital setting. While it's true, cruise ships aren't hospitals and infection control onboard is going to be different than in a hospital but, given the chaos in March of 2020, I can see why the CDC is being overly cautious here. That does not mean I like it. Practicing medicine within a hospital system and following infection control rules can be a giant pain in the ass. But, man, the consequences of ignoring this sort of stuff can be deadly. I personally think that what's being done with COVID related infection control aboard a ship is insufficiently bounded by adequate application of risk assessment tools. That's another matter entirely and what I think matters not.

Customs and Immigration.

I hope you are right. When things appeared to be going swimmingly in the UK and generally in Europe and European countries, especially Italy, Spain and Greece, seemed set to re-open airports and cruise ports to American citizens, I booked a Celebrity Reflection cruise out of Amsterdam with a Norwegian Fjord itinerary departing July 11th. That was then, this is now. I was almost certain cruising would resume in Europe before it would in the US. I have cruises from PEV booked in June (not likely to happen) and August (at risk). The cruises from US ports through July and into early August are almost certainly at risk given the CDC's insistence on executing what amounts to ridiculously complex over-kill given vaccine availability that will render most of the crazy stuff they are requiring unnecessary. I think this is what parties who have commented in the last 24h appear to be so aggravated about. Smokeybandit mentioned that the lawyers will be involved in these contracts the CDC is requiring between the lines and port authorities and that will induce hardships for all parties involved in this phased return. Still, I'm going to wait for a couple of weeks and see what transpires, assuming we get some details regarding progress toward completing Phase 2A from the CDC, port authorities and the major lines. The CDC talks about transparency and honesty with Americans. Fine. Show it to me in the next 2w.

An additional comment on my post above ......... Most of us, including myself, have little understanding of the complexity of various US government regulations. I'm working from distant memory here on an article I read a long time ago that the US is one of the least friendly nations to business interests due to the complex and difficult to understand regulatory environment. Well, the glimpse we got of it from the CDC is an eyeopener confirming that finding. I mention this only to say that, while I've never read the regulations that airlines, food and the trucking industries, for example, have to deal with, I'm going to assume those regulatory documents are as complex as what the CDC just issued on Friday. This isn't an excuse for the CDC. Like some here who have expressed opinions critical of the government's role in regulating everything that goes on in the US, I'm with you. But it is a reality that right now. We have to accept the impact of that reality on the cruising life we all want to return to. I don't want to politicize this post breaking forum rules but, I'll try to say this politely: Americans need to be wary of the expansion of government into our lives and businesses that the Public Health Emergency Declaration allowed. Tell your elected officials you're concerned about making sure we back out of this gracefully as the pandemic comes to a close.

I've read the entire CDC update to the CSO. It has to be understood in the context of the original NSO and the initial CSO issued right after the NSO expired in October, '20. I went back and read that 88 page monster too. First, both documents are incredibly complex and reveal the extent of interagency involvement in the NSO and CSO. The Modification issued this afternoon outlines the steps to take the cruise industry from Phase 1 to Phase 2A. Phase 1 dealt with crew health status on ships operating in international waters and wishing to call on US ports for supplies and fuel. Phase 1 extended and codified the color coding system that had evolved, described these and required cruise ships to be coded as green before they could port in US ports. Phase 1 has been applicable since that system was codified, I believe, sometime in late December shortly after the issuance of the CSO. What's happening now makes sense in that context. Phase 2A lists, in great detail, a requirement for cruise lines and port authorities to enter into separate contract agreements (by cruise company and cruise ship) for doing typical cruise ship embarkation and debarkation things as well as handling a passenger or passengers with suspected or confirmed COVID without stressing local and federal resources - like happened in March and April. There are recommendations that cruise ports figure out how they are going to handle multiple ships embarking and debarking in a single port with an eye towrd setting limits to how many ships can operate from a port at one time. Everything you'd expect would be required is required to insure the chaos that occurred as countries imposed lock-downs last March isn't repeated when cruise ship operations are green-lighted. Some of the chaos involved the refusal by port authorities to allow cruise ships to port and disembark passengers. This can't happen - ships with sick passengers cannot be barred from porting - and that is in the CDC phase 2A update. As well there were some pretty harry medevac scenarios carried out at sea for seriously ill passengers. You'll need to read the document in it's entirety to see all the requirements. Given my limited understanding, outside of observing them myself, of what's involved when a cruise ship with passengers ports, what's in the most recent CDC update is complete and extensive. I don't have any problems with what the CDC is requiring in Phase 2A and, IMO, it is definitely moving the process of getting cruise ships operating again. One can argue it's typical government over-reach and unnecessary regulatory intervention. Fine. Complain all you wish to. It won't matter. The path forward is clear and it involves a lot of stuff many of us think is unnecessary but it is what it is - accept it. The stuff released today certainly doesn't come close to what I think people wanted - a green-light to go ahead and start cruising your hearts out. That IS NOT going to happen. It's a process that is going to take a while to work through. My gut tells me it will move quickly considering the scope of what's required but I'd say a July restart could happen if the lines get through phase 2A quickly but there will be only a few ships per company starting out and this will slowly expand over time, a long time. I believe it will go like this after Phase 2A is completed: 2B involves test cruises, crew and ship's company only, and a by ship certification process for that. Phase 3 involves test cruises with select live passengers, phase 4 is closely monitored revenue sailings. This isn't defined anywhere I could find in the two documents (the CSO and today's mod of it). I'm reading between the lines and I may have missed it in that monster 88 page CSO. I would not be surprised at all that the cruise lines, having experience with such agreements between themselves and ports that have already authorized cruise ship operations in Europe, Israel, Asia and now the Caribbean, can comply quickly with all the technical aspects that were revealed today and identified as Phase 2A. That includes submitting these contract agreements to the CDC for review and approval on a company and then on a ship by ship basis. I've also read that port authorities in FL have been doing extensive preparations to restart cruise ship operations. It seems to me all parties should move ahead quickly in satisfying the CDC requirements for 2A. I also could be harboring a lot of wishful thinking. It's noteworthy that in several places within the modification document, there is mention of considering the role of vaccines and vaccinations in fashioning the contracts. For example, the CDC requires that ports establish standards for embarkation and debarkation within terminals that provide for mitigation measures consistent with those required by the CDC for congregate, housing facilities or federal transportation hubs (e.g., similar to prisons or government provided/subsidized housing, airports, bus terminals, train stations). In the case of cruise ports, that would be masks and distancing for porters, guest relations staff and all port employees that might have contact with arriving or departing passengers. Certainly, if everyone involved in embarkation and debarkation at a port is vaccinated, that changes the dynamic of mitigation measures and the CDC acknowledges that. But mandating vaccinations for port authorities is left up to individual ports. That's the CDC acknowledging that there are legal implications here for requiring employees to be vaccinated to work. As I said, I'm all for this, just like I'm for mandatory vaccinations for children to attend school or adults to go to college. Israel has made it very clear to their citizens, "you'll be left behind" if you don't get vaccinated. YMMV, JMO. I think the cruise lines were caught of-guard with the CDC release late on Friday afternoon before Easter weekend. The CDC was definitely feeling the heat. It's clear to me that the requirements detailed in Phase 2A didn't just get done in a week. They are incredibly robust and cover all manner of things that involve reducing the risk of a COVID outbreak on a cruise ship producing the scenes we saw last March and into April. I think the lines will get their act together quickly after some obvious scurrying today and will get through Phase 2A as quickly as they can .... and the CDC handles their review role expeditiously. I'm going to take a wait and see approach. Let's give the parties time to absorb all of this and react. I'll start ranting again if the entire month of April passes without some indication that stuff is getting done. I expect this is going to affect June sailings you might have booked from US ports. I think those will be cancelled sometime this month. July cruises are at risk but there's a chance, especially those after mid July.

Your entitled. Moving on beyond this controversial subject of vaccine passports ......... I don't get the impression that the countries that have allowed cruise ships to operate from their ports are requiring cruise lines to adopt a policy that all passengers and crew will be vaccinated. The policy of vaccinating crew adopted by the major lines emerged before the announcements that passenger sailings would begin from selected foreign ports. My take is that the cruise lines health panels discussing vaccines determined that adopting a policy that all passengers will require proof of vaccination before boarding was a proper step in moving forward toward more cruise ship operations. This is especially practical in countries that have low levels of circulating virus and want to keep it that way. I see it as bone the cruise lines are throwing to the Bahamian and St. Maarten Governments. I also agree with Smokeybandit ........ the Desantis EO barring the use of vaccine passports by businesses operating in FL under FL business licenses isn't going to affect cruise ships, when and if they obtain clearance from the CDC to operate from US ports, at all.

First, the EO he just signed applies only to businesses that are operating in FL with a FL issued business license. Cruise ships aren't that and I think that was addressed in several posts above. I don't know where to find this and I'm no expert in Maritime law but its my guess that ships operating from US ports are not subject to laws that might otherwise be in effect and that cover the port itself. You may recall that incidents involving crimes committed aboard ships are rarely tuned over to local authorities. Maritime authorities that a foreign flagged cruise ship agree to be subject to adjudicate these crimes. I will grant it's "possible" that the Desantis EO baring the use of vaccination passports might apply to cruise ships operating from FL ports but I highly doubt it. This is going to come out in an investigative article this weekend from one of S. FL's, Orlando's or Tampa's papers. So, stand by for confirmation that the EO doesn't apply to cruise ships and they can lawfully require vaccinations to board.

For those considering cruising on Celebrity ships, they're great if what you're looking for is an older demographic, almost zero kids if you cruise when schools are typically in session and, what Celebrity CEO, Lisa Lutoff-Perlo, has aggressively pursued since taking that position, "an upscale experience" e.g., retreat level stuff. Every ship, following industry trends, now has an some level of exclusivity that include separate dining, pools and lounge areas. We've not partaken in any of that so, can't offer any real insight as to value but, one thing is certain, we don't feel any less well served if we book our typical Veranda or OV cabin and dine in the main dining room or any of the other available specialty restaurants. One other note: This thing about X = excellence dating back to the late 90s before Celebrity was acquired by RCI is still present and how well this goes down onboard is very consistent between Celebrity's ships with minor variances depending on the Captain. When you are experiencing this, it is obvious that corporate has spelled out what is expected on their ships and this translates down to the Captains and from there to every Department head and then from their down to every service worker on the ship. It really is pretty amazing. It's a sign of great team building from the top down. All teams appear to have the same objective, customer satisfaction with the cruise experience on each ship. There's a lot of competition for recognition of that among staff and it's pretty obvious that corporate reads surveys and rewards/incentivizes crew members who perform. Edit: Comment on Twangster's post above. I don't think that there is any question that Perlo and her people have identified a population of cruisers who they are targeting that are willing to pay for exclusivity and onboard gambling, specialty dining and spa treatments - a long list of these that are very expensive and most likely highly profitable. The profits are in that approach not on folks who book inside cabins and spend nothing on anything else while aboard. At the same time, I think she's listened to comments by those who are more price conscious that they don't want to get priced out of cruising. There's plenty of cruising opportunities aboard Celebrity ships for middle income, fixed at that, retirees ..... not to mention there are a bundle of us who have the time and the resources to spend money on cruising. Can't ignore that population. I'll add that until the pandemic, base cruise fares across the industry have remained remarkably stable and a great value for more than a decade. There's a wide range of fares for anyone who wants to cruise. I think we will experience a pretty significant price increase as the lines try to bundle stuff to make it appear you're getting more. You probably aren't but, at this point, I'm willing to pay more, to a point, to cruise and I don't mind contributing to the health of a badly damaged cruise industry when it finally restarts in full.