smokeybandit Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 I'm surprised it took this long for someone (cruise lines or otherwise) to sue CruiseGus, ctigerk and MrMarc 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twangster Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Will be watching with interest. As soon as he announced the intent of what later became a law I was curious if it would hold up in court. Now we get to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswallow Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Complaint:1_051023578437_Complaint.pdf (2150.com) Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted July 13, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 17 minutes ago, dswallow said: Complaint:1_051023578437_Complaint.pdf (2150.com) I'm not a big fan of their arguments, especially as other cruise lines sail out of Florida while NCL basically says they can't sail at all. But, NCL may have put Florida in a corner as they'll have to be careful not to use contradictory arguments that they just used in their CDC lawsuit. barbeyg and Baked Alaska 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswallow Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Motion for Preliminary Injunction:3_051123579830_MotionForPreliminaryInjunction.pdf (2150.com) 3-1_051123579831_AffidavitDeclarationOfFrankDelRio.pdf (2150.com)3-2_051123579832_AffidavitDeclarationOfOlgaVieira.pdf (2150.com)3-3_051123579833_AffidavitDeclarationOfDrJukkaLaitamaki.pdf (2150.com)3-4_051123579834_AffidavitDeclarationOfDrStephenOstroff.pdf (2150.com) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted July 13, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, dswallow said: Motion for Preliminary Injunction:3_051123579830_MotionForPreliminaryInjunction.pdf (2150.com) This is the kind of over the top stuff that got shoved back in the face of the CDC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Surprised a lawsuit wasn't filed sooner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGTLH Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Judge is Kathleen M. Williams, Obama nomination. Link to Court Listener: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60053753/norwegian-cruise-line-holdings-ltd-v-rivkees-md/ Matt and LovetoCruise87 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGTLH Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Wow... Guess NCL is really trying to press some buttons with Florida... MOTION OF NCLH FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMICI CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL To summarize NCLH’s views (which are more fully described in the brief) NCLH supports the Conditional Sailing Order and is committed to comply fully with it. https://1drv.ms/b/s!AjpWMo-t4z28-jFFsCMFP_7tUQw5?e=6WaTKL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruisinghawg Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 Well if it is overturned then we lose a freedom and the corporate world can now hold it over our heads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barbeyg Posted July 13, 2021 Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 A month ago, they were threatening to leave FL: https://patch.com/florida/miami/cruise-line-threatens-skip-fl-ports-over-vaccine-passport-ban That threat didn’t generate the change they desired. They really don’t have any other option but to sue if they want to restrict to only vaccinated passengers. I guess this will drag thru the courts, like the State of FL vs CDC. Am I the only one who thinks by the time these are finally resolved, it won’t matter anymore? jticarruthers and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted July 13, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2021 8 minutes ago, barbeyg said: A month ago, they were threatening to leave FL: https://patch.com/florida/miami/cruise-line-threatens-skip-fl-ports-over-vaccine-passport-ban That threat didn’t generate the change they desired. They really don’t have any other option but to sue if they want to restrict to only vaccinated passengers. I guess this will drag thru the courts, like the State of FL vs CDC. Am I the only one who thinks by the time these are finally resolved, it won’t matter anymore? The goal there is to get the injunction (much like Florida vs CDC). The lawsuit itself will take a long time that NCL surely isn't willing to wait for. barbeyg and WesKinetic 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CruiseGus Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 Since the Supreme Court ruled over 100 years ago that state governments could require vaccination for reasons of public health. It would logically apply that a private company could require them to safely conduct their business. The fact that recently the Hospital in Houston reinforced this by winning their lawsuit to require nurses to be vaccinated in order to be employed, is a good indicator that NCL will prevail over Florida. The sooner the better. ctigerk, columbus_cruiser, LovetoCruise87 and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twangster Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 I'm surprised the CDC didn't get slapped for violating free speech. It's one thing to prevent a cruise line from operating a cruise over 7 nights in the CSO. The CDC prohibited cruise lines from marketing cruises over 7 nights. They basically told cruise lines you are not allowed to talk about cruises over 7 nights. LovetoCruise87 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLMoran Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 Gentle reminder about what “freedom of speech” actually covers: https://xkcd.com/1357/ NCL saying their first amendment rights were violated is complete and utter BS. Sounds like their lawyers need to go back to third-grade Social Studies and pass the class this time. KaydenDeen and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baltodave Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 3 hours ago, JLMoran said: Gentle reminder about what “freedom of speech” actually covers: https://xkcd.com/1357/ NCL saying their first amendment rights were violated is complete and utter BS. Sounds like their lawyers need to go back to third-grade Social Studies and pass the class this time. With all due respect I don't see it that way (and I am not a lawyer). Also there are two sides (some people tell me 3) to every story. Here's my take: The First Amendment prevents governments from limiting speech. NCL claims that its desire to request evidence of vaccination constitutes speech and Florida's law prevents them from doing that. The 14th Amendment basically says states (e.g. Florida) cannot pass laws that are in conflict with federal laws Finally, I don't recall learning constitutional law in the 3rd grade (in fact, I had to just look up the 14th Amendment) So, I don't think this is so cut & dry and will be interesting to see how this turns out. IMHO, the big question is whether or not businesses requesting vaccination status constitutes "free speech". dswallow and columbus_cruiser 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovetoCruise87 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 13 hours ago, smokeybandit said: The goal there is to get the injunction (much like Florida vs CDC). The lawsuit itself will take a long time that NCL surely isn't willing to wait for. Right! Get the injunction. The lawsuit could last well past summer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twangster Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 The only reason I think the free speech element of this case is weak is because I don't think the law states they can't communicate with their customers or talk about vaccinations in general terms. All cruise lines including NCL have sections on their public websites that talk about vaccinations and their policies. Florida law doesn't prohibit them from using the vaccination word, encouraging vaccinations or from "talking" about policies involving vaccinations. The NCL website has verbiage that explains their vaccination requirement. Florida has not cited NCL or penalized them based on this law, at least not that has been made public. Both Carnival and Royal are asking the question to guests in the form ... will you consent to provide evidence of vaccination? Florida law doesn't prohibit them from asking these types of questions. Make no mistake. This is a bone head law that was rushed through the process in a matter of weeks. It is not possible to create good law in mere weeks. The free speech element of the case is weak but such is the game that is played with many lawsuits - not every claim has to be 100% irrefutable to include it. Kathleen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted July 14, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 45 minutes ago, baltodave said: With all due respect I don't see it that way (and I am not a lawyer). Also there are two side (some people tell me 3) to every story. Here's my take: The First Amendment prevents governments from limiting speech. NCL claims that its desire to request evidence of vaccination constitutes speech and Florida's law prevents them from doing that. The 14th Amendment basically says states (e.g. Florida) cannot pass laws that are in conflict with federal laws Finally, I don't recall learning constitutional law in the 3rd grade (in fact, I had to just look up the 14th Amendment) So, I don't think this is so cut & dry and will be interesting to see how this turns out. IMHO, the big question is whether or not businesses requesting vaccination status constitutes "free speech". I find all three to be poor arguments (from NCL's side). Laws every day prevent "free speech" by individuals and corporations. And I'm not sure how the 14th amendment is in place since there's no federal law that the FL state law is conflicting. WAAAYTOOO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruisinghawg Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 Are we willing to give up a freedom to cruise? Can we not see that this statute guarantees my right to shop at my local grocery store without pulling out a passport and showing the bouncer at the door? If this prevails what freedom will we lose next? All the cruise lines tried to work with both the CDC and the state of Florida except NCL. It just looks like they are sitting on the floor like a petulant child kicking their legs and screaming "mommy I want, I want my way". jticarruthers and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAAAYTOOO Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 2 hours ago, JLMoran said: their lawyers need to go back to third-grade Social Studies and pass the class this time. Oh....if they ONLY taught social studies anymore. Not at ANY grade level, unfortunately. stevendom57, teddy, Ampurp85 and 1 other 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimnKathy Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 19 minutes ago, WAAAYTOOO said: Oh....if they ONLY taught social studies anymore. Not at ANY grade level, unfortunately. But I thought that's what FB and Twitter are for? WAAAYTOOO, cruisinghawg, MrMarc and 3 others 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswallow Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 2 hours ago, cruisinghawg said: Are we willing to give up a freedom to cruise? Can we not see that this statute guarantees my right to shop at my local grocery store without pulling out a passport and showing the bouncer at the door? If this prevails what freedom will we lose next? All the cruise lines tried to work with both the CDC and the state of Florida except NCL. It just looks like they are sitting on the floor like a petulant child kicking their legs and screaming "mommy I want, I want my way". At best you have claim that shopping at a grocery store is an essential activity, and even there you would be subject to rules for public health reasons, which, yes, could include needing to provide vaccination against some infectious disease should the protection of public health warrant it in such circumstances. Cruising most certainly is not. And speaking of petulant children kicking and screaming... probably a particularly poor choice to include such an analogy with your particular argument. CruiseGus, teddy and KaydenDeen 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovetoCruise87 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 I think that Royal has a great plan in place, and a work around so to speak. Would it be great if everyone on the ship was vaccinated, sure. But getting the vaccine is a personal choice, we can't make someone get it. All the safety protocols are in place and everything is working as it should. I don't believe that NCl will be successful in this given what other lines are already doing. WAAAYTOOO and CaraMiaBelle 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLMoran Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 17 minutes ago, LovetoCruise87 said: I think that Royal has a great plan in place, and a work around so to speak. Would it be great if everyone on the ship was vaccinated, sure. But getting the vaccine is a personal choice, we can't make someone get it. All the safety protocols are in place and everything is working as it should. I don't believe that NCl will be successful in this given what other lines are already doing. See, I disagree for the exact reason you just gave. This is a free market and if FL's law didn't block it, NCL could require proof of vaccination while RCL and Carnival don't. Consumers have choice here, they can choose to sail on a fully vaccinated sailing or one that's mixed vax'ed / unvax'ed. Market will speak, all businesses get to operate and see who has the more desirable / profitable option. Yes, I'm aware that prior to this law going into effect that RCL was also going to have only fully vax'ed sailings in FL as well. But Carnival notably wasn't, and was proudly marketing that fact. So even then you still had a free-market system working. But it was never given a chance to play out because Florida's governor decided he knew better, and IMO overreached badly with this blanket law that impacts every business. Baked Alaska, mjb1127, MamaShark and 2 others 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovetoCruise87 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 16 minutes ago, JLMoran said: Yes, I'm aware that prior to this law going into effect that RCL was also going to have only fully vax'ed sailings in FL as well. But Carnival notably wasn't, and was proudly marketing that fact. So even then you still had a free-market system working. But it was never given a chance to play out because Florida's governor decided he knew better, and IMO overreached badly with this blanket law that impacts every business. I agree with you on this. I also believe that our governor did overreach on this and I am not happy about it. I would rather it not be in place, and like you said, allow passengers to choose what type of cruise to go on. mjb1127, Kathleen and Baked Alaska 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee23 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 5 hours ago, cruisinghawg said: Are we willing to give up a freedom to cruise? Can we not see that this statute guarantees my right to shop at my local grocery store without pulling out a passport and showing the bouncer at the door? If this prevails what freedom will we lose next? All the cruise lines tried to work with both the CDC and the state of Florida except NCL. It just looks like they are sitting on the floor like a petulant child kicking their legs and screaming "mommy I want, I want my way". I'm sympathetic with this to a degree... I'm worried about anything that could essentially require you to establish your identity in order to function as a private citizen going about your life. It has the potential to become state-sponsored surveillance of citizens without cause so quickly that it is not even worth discussing in my book. However, you already have to establish who you are and provide relevant certifications of your own health to travel internationally. I think the case against a vaccine requirement for travel is diminished by that fact. cruisellama and mjb1127 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruisellama Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 I’m in the camp of enabling private persons or businesses the ability to control their own destiny. No shirt no shoes no service. MamaShark, mjb1127 and Kathleen 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonOasis Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 It would appear as though Carnival Cruise Lines will follow Royal Caribbean's lead, any passenger who is unvaccinated or does not wish to voluntarily share their vaccination status will be required to purchase travel insurance that includes medical coverage should they need to be disembarked from the ship. Also Carnival is saying unvaccinated passengers will be limited to certain areas of the ship they will not be able to experience all the venues and activities. This change is for all passengers cruising out of Florida, passengers departing from a cruise port outside of Florida will not be required to purchase travel insurance because adult passengers will not be allowed to sail if they are not vaccinated. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carnival-unvaccinated-policy-florida-royal-caribbean-cruise-lines-insurance/ Not sure why NCL doesn't just go this routes as well out of Florida. mjb1127 and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danv3 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 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%. LovetoCruise87 and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 27 minutes ago, danv3 said: 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. Not all laws passed are constitutional. That's what this lawsuit is challenging, in my opinion. I'm no legal expert at all, but I think the commerce clause issue may end up being a strong factor. Kathleen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswallow Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 NCLH has filed a motion to hold a status conference and included copies of an email chain attempting to open communication with the office in Florida. A little snit of sorts going on.https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11_051023587474_MotionStatusConference.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-1_051123587475_EmailChain.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-2_051123587476_EmailChain.pdfNorwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (2150.com) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted July 15, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 NCL coming across as a whiny brat that's still bitter the CDC didn't fawn all over them back when they said "we'll be happy to cruise at 100% if you let us cruise now" jticarruthers and WAAAYTOOO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CruiseGus Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 7 hours ago, JasonOasis said: Not sure why NCL doesn't just go this routes as well out of Florida. Because it is not the right thing to do for the cruise industry as a whole. only time will tell for sure, but as we are now seeing in the USA the vast majority of cases of covid running ramped again are in unvaccinated individuals. mjb1127 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danv3 Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 11 hours ago, Matt said: Not all laws passed are constitutional. That's what this lawsuit is challenging, in my opinion. I'm no legal expert at all, but I think the commerce clause issue may end up being a strong factor. 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? WAAAYTOOO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danv3 Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 11 hours ago, dswallow said: NCLH has filed a motion to hold a status conference and included copies of an email chain attempting to open communication with the office in Florida. A little snit of sorts going on.https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11_051023587474_MotionStatusConference.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-1_051123587475_EmailChain.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-2_051123587476_EmailChain.pdfNorwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (2150.com) Litigators... *shakes head* jticarruthers 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGTLH Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 A hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction is SCHEDULED for August 6, 2021 at 10:00 AM Ref: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.596136/gov.uscourts.flsd.596136.12.0_1.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswallow Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 Florida has filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to the motion for preliminary injunction. They are asking to have until July 30, 2021, and to extend the time for NCLH to reply to August 6, 2021, and then a hearing at an unspecified later date. Of interest, though, is that as part of this motion they have included Exhibit D which is a transcript of the hearing that was held on May 12, 2021 from Florida v. HHS, CDC (8:21-cv-00839), which we haven't seen before, and isn't scheduled for release online until 8/11/2021.Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (2150.com)https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16_051023592514_DefendantsExpeditedMotionForExtensionOfTime.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16-1_051123592515_ExhibitA.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16-2_051123592516_ExhibitB.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16-4_051123592518_ExhibitD.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16-4_051123592518_ExhibitD.pdfhttps://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/16-5_051123592519_TextOfProposedOrder.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshleyDillo Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 37 minutes ago, dswallow said: Of interest, though, is that as part of this motion they have included Exhibit D which is a transcript of the hearing that was held on May 12, 2021 from Florida v. HHS, CDC (8:21-cv-00839), which we haven't seen before, and isn't scheduled for release online until 8/11/2021. It's quite an entertaining read. Poor Ms. Powell was getting quite flustered there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGTLH Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 Turtles, baby turtles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.