Jump to content
Royal Caribbean Blog

State of Florida Sues CDC Over Cruise Shut Down


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, cruisinghawg said:

Somebody needs to do a background check on the people or person making the decision on this cruising debacle. We may find a deep hatred of the industry. 

Someone give them a free cruise! Once you cruise once you're pretty hooked, in my experience!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 603
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

To illustrate the impact of one ship leaving Florida and sailing from the Bahamas, Michael Bayley recently estimated just under 2,000 guests per weekend will be sailing from Nassau. That sounds about

Maybe California will contemplate convening a study to explore the idea of considering a tentative involvement in a limited commitment to a flexible proposal surrounding the concept of engaging in pre

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!

Posted Images

On 4/26/2021 at 7:39 AM, jticarruthers said:

Good to see progress but unfortunately I think May 12th means July is basically DOA, even a favorable ruling at that point puts them at less than 60 days to get up to speed ... unless the cruise lines are so comfortable with the strength of the suit that they gear up to go live "at risk".

Carnival is still being pretty bullish from Galveston for 5 July (I think).  Leaning --------->forward

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JeffB said:

A week? Don't think so. This was an expedited or emergency hearing that the court granted (that's a positve). I think its imminent. One possibility is that the Judge has invited the parties to meet under the threat that he's told them one or the other has made a case. 

Jeff would this be a case where the attorney's meet in a conference room and attempt to come to an agreeable, I hesitate to use the term compromise, so how about conclusion. Or is this a case where you would wasting time? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, cruisinghawg said:

Jeff would this be a case where the attorney's meet in a conference room and attempt to come to an agreeable, I hesitate to use the term compromise, so how about conclusion. Or is this a case where you would wasting time? 

That would be mediation. This is a preliminary hearing, ostensibly before civil trial, for the purpose of determining if an immediate injunction against the enforcement of the CDC's CSO is warranted to grant relief from irreparable harm that the state of FL has suffered and will continue to suffer if the CSO is enforced.

This hearing was requested by the state of FL in a motion filed with the middle court of FL. It is  a separate filing from the the law suit filed on 4/8/21. This motion was, I believe, filed in late April. 

Something that occurs to me as I write this is that if the Judge does not issue an injunction out of this preliminary hearing, the case still moves to trial unless the Judge dismisses it on some other grounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, cruisinghawg said:

Somebody needs to do a background check on the people or person making the decision on this cruising debacle. We may find a deep hatred of the industry. 

I've long thought someone at the CDC had a bad cruise.  Maybe their lover hooked up with another guest or maybe they are one of those people who write bad reviews because they made bad assumptions.  

Come to think of it, making bad assumptions fits.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, twangster said:

I've long thought someone at the CDC had a bad cruise.  Maybe their lover hooked up with another guest or maybe they are one of those people who write bad reviews because they made bad assumptions.  

Come to think of it, making bad assumptions fits.  

 

My guess is they got mad at someone for taking their poolside chair that they were squatting for the previous 4 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, twangster said:

I've long thought someone at the CDC had a bad cruise.  Maybe their lover hooked up with another guest or maybe they are one of those people who write bad reviews because they made bad assumptions.  

Come to think of it, making bad assumptions fits.  

Maybe they got norovirus or maybe they were on a less than stellar cruise line. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jill said:

Maybe they got norovirus or maybe they were on a less than stellar cruise line. 

According to the CDC around 1% of all noro outbreaks come from cruise ships.  Ships don't even make their top noro sources list:

 1356217779_cdcnoro.jpg.65a7e2158123838eeb931741eb4b5cb3.jpg

Hmmm.  I wonder if they'll round that 1% up to 10% now using their new math.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, twangster said:

According to the CDC around 1% of all noro outbreaks come from cruise ships.  Ships don't even make their top noro sources list:

 1356217779_cdcnoro.jpg.65a7e2158123838eeb931741eb4b5cb3.jpg

Hmmm.  I wonder if they'll round that 1% up to 10% now using their new math.  

I don't know, that data is from the CDC. Can we trust it to be accurate? Did they round down those 2189 outbreaks from 218,900? So many questions? 😄 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, twangster said:

According to the CDC around 1% of all noro outbreaks come from cruise ships.  Ships don't even make their top noro sources list:

 1356217779_cdcnoro.jpg.65a7e2158123838eeb931741eb4b5cb3.jpg

Hmmm.  I wonder if they'll round that 1% up to 10% now using their new math.  

And only 10% of all reported GI issues on cruise ships are actually norovirus.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Life at the house of the CDC family:

Celebrating the 10 year old's 100th birthday. 

Wearing a gas mask while sleeping in case of fire.
Ensuring that everyone sleeps for 80 hours a night.

Walking for ten hours instead of driving to reduce risk.
Cooking all red meat to 1600 degrees.

Essentially, just the most risk-averse and numerically illiterate household possible!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, twangster said:

So 1%?

According to the VSP, only about 0.2% of cruise passengers report a GI-like illness consistent with norovirus and of them 10% are actually norovirus. So on a cruise ship, 0.02%.  

 

So if 0.02% of cruise passengers getting norovirus makes up 1% of the national amount of norovirus, I'll take those odds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The judge may not grant an injunction but I do feel like the suit did cause action on the part of the CDC.  I'm not sure the latest updates for vaccinated guests would have been introduced without the lawsuit. 

The pressure is definitely on the CDC for their pandemic guidance. That they have a strangle hold on a very large business operation is, IMO, unconscionable. One of the CDC's arguments supporting their CSO is that, hey cruise lines, we have provided a path forward via the CSO. You just don't want to do it the way we have the authority to tell you to do it.

Note that the FL suit doesn't challenge the CDC's authority to regulate under U.S.C 42. What they have challenged, in part, is how the CDC went about fulfilling that authority.... an administrative procedures error.

We can argue the benefit of the CSO defined gates and protocols versus the cost and difficulty in following them but the bottom line is, "we provided you a pathway........ follow it and you can cruise after you prove you can implement them. or vaccinate everyone."

We know this position is unreasonable by virtue of the minimal risks of disease spread on board a ship, with or without vaccinations. State wide and specific counties where FL cruise ports are located are nearing that sustained  magic number (5%) at which the virus is considered adequately controlled. So, the CSO makes no sense .... to us or to cruise line executives. Cruise lines have been safely sailing, without a requirement for vaccinations elsewhere unencumbered by the US CDC's dictates. Think about sailing where everyone is vaccinated. Who needs the CSO?

TBH, I don't know who referees that debate. It seems to me quite separate from the claims FL is making in it's civil suit.

It would seem the plot thickens and I suspect that's what Judge Merryday is working his way through.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

A little more info on today's hearing.

CDC still saying they've done all they need to do and it's up to the cruise lines to meet the CSO terms now.

 

https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/regional/florida/florida-cruise-lawsuit-federal-hearing/67-3afb2c9f-7abc-4f8d-8b3e-3400a5fdbb52?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

They are so flippin arrogant. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be coming down to a state v. federal authority issue. There is somewhere in the applicable law that if the feds step in, in this case the state's right to regulate public health risks in state ports, they must first consult state PH authorities. I'm not entirely versed in the law to know. But I think this is a sticky issue. Ports are federally regulated I think.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JeffB said:

This may be coming down to a state v. federal authority issue. There is somewhere in the applicable law that if the feds step in, in this case the state's right to regulate public health risks in state ports, they must first consult state PH authorities. I'm not entirely versed in the law to know. But I think this is a sticky issue. Ports are federally regulated I think.  

They absolutely are federally refulated... That's why Florida chose the arguments which focus on the overly broad and seemingly capricious implementation of regulation rather than the CDC's right to regulate in the first place. I think that the scatter shot CDC response only came after the threat of lawsuits works against them, but what do I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LizzyBee23 said:

They absolutely are federally refulated... That's why Florida chose the arguments which focus on the overly broad and seemingly capricious implementation of regulation rather than the CDC's right to regulate in the first place. I think that the scatter shot CDC response only came after the threat of lawsuits works against them, but what do I know.

Not as simple as it might appear. You're correct in characterizing the thrust of the FL law suit as "focused" on capricious (and discriminatory) implementation of regulations by the CDC. The CDC counters with cruise ships being unique in their potential to spread disease. That might be arguable. However, even though the CSO may be dated and cumbersome, I don't think that is a point upon which Judge Merryday will rule on. He will rule on CDC regulations that conflict with FL's regulatory authority within the ports themselves. 

Federal regulation of FL ports ends at the water's edge. The port itself is governed and regulated by county port authorities at least in the case of Miami-Dade (Port of Miami) and Broward (PEV) counties. I believe Tampa's port and Port Canaveral are also governed by County port authorities. When it comes to the CDC requiring cruise lines to do anything ashore, e.g. require the lines to coordinate with local authorities on the disposition of COVID infected crew or PAX, I believe that is a clear case of federal over-reach. Judge Merryday's inquiry during the hearing about how the State of FL was going to protect against disease spread within the ports where county port authorities have regulatory authority was telling.  

Here's how I see this thing working out: Some of the CSO is going to be enjoined. Our hope that the whole thing will be enjoined isn't likely to happen. Cruise lines have probably figured this out and hence have been publicly announcing that they have been "working with the CDC and in contact with them almost daily." That tells me, as someone else pointed out, the lines don't want to piss them off knowing they're going to have to implement and comply with some of the CSO stuff. Meanwhile they are probably hoping they can negotiate the ones that really are onerous, e.g., applying for and conducting test sailings among others.

I still think a July 1 return to cruising from US ports is entirely feasible but at a significantly reduced level. There are tell tale signs that this is the cruise line's plans. They are heavy on European sailings and light on US sailings as far as we know right now with NCL, MSC and others. The lines probably think they can get a few ships through the CDC's hoops by July one and by the fall when things are back to normal, resume a more robust schedule of sailings form US ports after the CDC has relaxed or abandoned requirements within the CSO as the pandemic fades.  RCG has been a little more circumspect with their operational plans. As well, Alaska itineraries are still very much up in the air given the Jones Act and I'm not sure where that battle stands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...