Jump to content

Bye Bye Mask Mandates! Maybe?


Recommended Posts

The White House has announced that it is going to leave it up to the CDC to appeal or not.  LOL

With all the agencies, federal or not, doing away with the mandate, I suspect that the CDC will just not do anything/let it go away quietly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 1st Mate said:

The White House has announced that it is going to leave it up to the CDC to appeal or not.  LOL

With all the agencies, federal or not, doing away with the mandate, I suspect that the CDC will just not do anything/let it go away quietly.

I don't know about anyone else, but pitterpattering around on an appeal while not seeking a stay in the mean time doesn't do much to convince a judge that there's some urgent health protocol that your appeal is seeking to preserve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DunkelBierJay said:

I am wondering if we can expect an announcement from the FL ports soon...so far Miami, Everglades, Canaveral and Tampa have no announcements on their social media

At a meeting of Port Canaveral today, they said they're gonna leave it up to the lines

 

Port Everglades told me essentially the same thing yesterday

"Our intention at Port Everglades is to allow the cruise lines to take the lead on instituting and maintaining their own safety policies in the cruise terminals and on their ships."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“As a result of a court order, effective immediately and as of April 18, 2022, CDC’s January 29, 2021 Order requiring masks on public transportation conveyances and at transportation hubs is no longer in effect. Therefore, CDC will not enforce the Order. CDC continues to recommend that people wear masks in indoor public transportation settings at this time.”

– CDC.gov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, LovetoCruise87 said:

“As a result of a court order, effective immediately and as of April 18, 2022, CDC’s January 29, 2021 Order requiring masks on public transportation conveyances and at transportation hubs is no longer in effect. Therefore, CDC will not enforce the Order. CDC continues to recommend that people wear masks in indoor public transportation settings at this time.”

– CDC.gov

This tells me that pretty soon we should not have to wear masks at the ports when checking in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, smokeybandit said:

But the port staff aren't cruise line staff are they?

Both. The people you interact with are third party. 

But there are Royal Caribbean people overseeing the process. If you've ever had a problem, inevitably a Royal Caribbean person shows up.

assume its the cruise line giving the general orders to the third party that carries out the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 1st Mate said:

The White House has announced that it is going to leave it up to the CDC to appeal or not.  LOL

With all the agencies, federal or not, doing away with the mandate, I suspect that the CDC will just not do anything/let it go away quietly.

My take is the judge's ruling gives our elected officials a backdoor out of the mask mandates.  If things go south healthwise the judge becomes the scapegoat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Cruise Hive:

 

The U.S. Coast Guard has announced it will no longer be enforcing the use of masks on public maritime vessels, which includes cruise ships and port terminals. This followed a judge’s ruling that the CDC mask order, which applied to all persons traveling on ships into, within, or out of the United States and to all persons at US ports, had been vacated.

For now, federal agencies are looking at the court’s decision. At least one cruise port, the Port of Boston, has announced it will not be enforcing masks anymore at its facilities. Whether others will follow that example is becoming more likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, 1st Mate said:

Well, the DOJ has decided to appeal the Florida's judge's ruling.

Wish I could say what I want to say.  But, I'd get kicked out of here.

On the bright side, I think this is just white wash.  It may not be an honest attempt at overthrowing anything. 

We'll see!

I think the judge's order will stand.  The CDC's argument that this specific ruling could impact it ability to oversee public health should there be another pandemic is nothing more than a scare tactic.  And their argument that they still need to protect immune compromised individuals on traveling on mass transit doesn't hold water because at this point it is every persons individual responsibility to protect themselves whether they are immune compromised or not.  My dad who is immune compromised continues to double mask he wears a 3 ply surgical mask and an N95 mask on top of the surgical mask. He and my mom are getting on an airplane in couple of weeks heading to Hawaii. Both have been vaccinated and because of their age and my dads condition they've been double boosted my mother said she is not wearing a mask on the 9+ hour nonstop flight from Chicago to Maui, they will not cancel their vacation after more than 2 years of not taking one and my dad is good with that.  At this point in the pandemic I think any reasonable judge will see that we don't need the CDC to hold our hand any longer with mandates.  It is past time that people take personal responsibility for their own safety and if you think the risk is to high then stay home and let the rest of us get on with our lives.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JasonOasis said:

And their argument that they still need to protect immune compromised individuals on traveling on mass transit doesn't hold water because at this point it is every persons individual responsibility to protect themselves whether they are immune compromised or not.

Especially since this has never been their justification to extend the mask mandate in the past, including a week ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This particular ruling by federal Judge Kimball Mizelle involves the CDC's mandate on federally regulated transportation facilities and equipment. It may result in an appeal that won't go quite like the last one CDC initiated after Judge Merryday enjoined the CDC's cruise ship no sail order.

The reason for that is that the CDC's mask mandate applies to federally regulated transportation facilities and equipment, not privately owned cruise lines. Certainly, there is room for interpretation on whether the federal government (HHS/CDC) is within it's congressionally authorized legal authority in both challenges.  Clearly, there was with the Desantis challenge of the CDC's no-sail order but the interpretation favored the litigants that were the aggrieved party. 

I thought Judge Merryday's ruling enjoining the CDC's no-sail order was legally and constitutionally solid.  The CDC argued that the concept of "free pratique" extended to it's authority to shut the cruise industry down. Merryday articulately opined that it didn't because the cruise lines were privately owned businesses. His opinion prevailed and the no-sail order was abandoned by the CDC for creating the voluntary one - which the cruise lines, en mass, decided to comply with. A nice face saving route for the CDC granted by the lines that alternatively could have sought blood revenge..... retrospectively, a very smart move by the lines, IMO.   

I'm less sure that the CDC's authority to mandate masks in the case of appropriately regulated transportation facilities and equipment case is unlawful. I think the ruling by Judge Kimbal Mizzelle is on less solid ground. It may not matter as Judge Kimball Mizzelle has opened the pandora's box of "the public will." There's no question the public hates masks in most settings, justified or not, based on the science or quackery. There appears to be an identifiable drift towards letting organizations impacted by the narrow case of mask mandates to make them optional at their discretion. That is likely to be the appeals and court's and the USSC's default argument.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, WAAAYTOOO said:

As another poster said, I also believe this appeal is about being able to instate a new mandate again in the future, not about re-unseating this one.

Totally agree with half of that.  But, I'd be willing to bet a dollar that if successful, the mandate will be reinstated THAT DAY, even if for only one day.  Can't get into why though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...