Jump to content

danv3

Members
  • Posts

    145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by danv3

  1. I don’t think there’s any uproar at all. RCI, at least, wants to be running fully-vaccinated cruises, as evidenced by the fact that they’re already doing so everywhere (I think?) but Florida. These changes by the islands just give them more cover to do what they have wanted to do all along in Florida as well.
  2. Great news. I hope more of the islands do likewise. Note that rule as written is only in effect from September 3 through November 1.
  3. There's no doubt that the cruise lines have done a lot to ensure guest safety and mitigate COVID risk. That said, I'm not sure a cruise line super fan message board is going to provide the most unbiased response to an inquiry like this. Naturally almost everyone here thinks cruises are more safe than a resort. You have some time to wait and see...it's quite possible that Delta will have burned itself out by December and be on the decline. *fingers crossed*
  4. It’s the last paragraph: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (DE 3) is GRANTED. Defendant is ENJOINED from enforcing Section 381.00316 against Plaintiffs pending resolution of the merits of this case. (Plaintiffs being NCLH and some related parties)
  5. As I read the injunction, Florida is only prohibited from enforcing its law against NCL. Royal and Carnival may need to file their own lawsuits if they want to be similarly protected.
  6. I’m genuinely shocked by this outcome. The bits of the opinion I’m reading from articles (I haven’t read the whole opinion yet) seem very outcome based. The judge seemed to know that the policy behind the law was wrong and strained to find a justification to strike it down. Maybe the Florida legislature amends the law to exempt cruises now.
  7. Who is surprised that RCI is giving out new/different information from what we all seem to think?
  8. I hope more ports will impose such vaccination requirements since the lines (and Florida) are unwilling.
  9. The good (?) news is, at the rate RCL changes protocols, there's a pretty high chance that your expectations will be met. Well, except for the one that matters: a vaccination requirement.
  10. More testing means one thing: More cases (and thus more cancelled cruises). Not sure it’s safer for the vaccinated, but we’re all about bending over backwards for the unvaccinated in the US, so here we are.
  11. The chances of the CSO not being extended are probably less than 2%. The bigger question is what new requirements are the CDC and cruise lines going to impose on the vaccinated between now and then.
  12. Very unfortunate. Way too much testing of non-sick people going on and almost exclusively to protect people who won't get vaccinated. RCI should be allowed to sail 100% vaccinated cruises. Florida, much more than the CDC, really messed things up for them.
  13. Basically, CDC is saying that it won't broadly enforce the general mask order that applies to all transportation (i.e., all people at all places on a ship) as long as cruise lines voluntarily follow the CSO. If a cruise line declines to follow the CSO, then the CDC will vigorously enforce the mask requirement at all times on the non-CSO-compliant ship. Looks to me like the CDC remains in control. Florida has "won" by getting a preliminary injunction, but the CDC has sufficiently cowed the cruise lines that they all intend to "voluntarily" follow the CSO.
  14. I don't think the action in the 11th Circuit is over. CDC appealed Merryday's PI ruling. All the 11th Circuit has ruled on to date was the CDC's motion to stay the PI during the appeal. The appeal of the PI itself is ongoing. CDC's brief is due September 1. https://www.2150.com/files/cc/USCA11-21-12243/23_011111857305_BriefingNotice.pdf Then Florida will respond and CDC will reply to that response. Then an argument will be scheduled. That's looking to me like mid- to late-October unless the parties and the court accelerate things considerably. While Merryday might issue an order clarifying the status of his PI now, I think that because his PI was to go into effect on July 18, he declined to stay it, and then the 11th Circuit (eventually) also declined to stay it, that means that Merryday's ruling is now in effect. Practically, I don't think that matters, because the cruiselines aren't going to rush out and start ignoring CDC's guidance. Very little should change. As far as I can tell the only thing happening on August 12 in the district court is that CDC will file its answer to Florida's complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flmd.388773/gov.uscourts.flmd.388773.103.0.pdf They will deny everything that's relevant, and this will not be a very meaningful document. I think we are months away from any final ruling in Merryday's court. All that effectively matters now is (1) whether the CDC asks SCOTUS to impose a stay (seems unlikely) or (2) whether the 11th Circuit reverses Merryday's PI.
  15. SCOTUS and Thomas were not involved. The 11th Circuit reversed itself “sua sponte” according to the order, which means the judges did it on their own. They must have realized they made a significant error of law in the stay order and wanted to fix it before SCOTUS overruled them. Here’s the SCOTUS docket with no rulings noted as of now: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21a5.html
  16. Not sure why the CDC would negotiate at this point. The CSO remains in effect and they're fairly likely to get a written COA opinion in a few weeks endorsing a tremendous expansion of their power.
  17. You're certainly right that not all laws are constitutional, but the legislative background makes NCLH's argument harder. One of the big issues in the Florida v. CDC case was that the CDC acted unilaterally on an administrative basis (and far beyond any regulatory authority it had ever used previously). A state legislature has much broader powers. Fundamentally, this really comes down to NCLH disagreeing with the law and its lack of an exception for cruise lines. They've had to dress up that disagreement into constitutional arguments. But the biggest problem for NCLH is that other cruise lines are already successfully sailing from Florida in compliance with Florida's law and without material COVID issues. That by itself basically sinks any chance of getting a preliminary injunction. Where is the irreparable harm?
  18. These are really weak arguments NCLH is raising. Due Process and dormant commerce clause seem almost laughable. We don't have to like the Florida statute, but it is clearly a law duly passed by the legislature and signed by the governor, so there's a presumption of validity. NCLH's arguments all really boil down to "we can't operate how we want to, and the way we now have to operate is too hard." (Except it's not too hard as RCI is already proving.) The chance of a preliminary injunction being entered here has got to be less than 5%.
  19. I can assure you with a high degree of certainty that Judge Merryday's "hordes" of either two or three law clerks are absolutely sworn to secrecy. Lawyers could certainly speculate about what the ruling would be based on comments made at the hearings, Merryday's background and prior rulings, etc., but I don't believe for a minute that anyone had any notice of the outcome until the option was filed and the attorneys of record got an email telling them an order was entered.
  20. This. There will be some changes in policies but nothing groundbreaking. Perhaps they'll start getting ships back into service a little bit faster now that they don't have to do test cruises after mid-July, but even that I think is limited more by staffing and other practical considerations more than whether the CSO is in place.
×
×
  • Create New...