DeSantis files suit against Biden Admin and the CDC

[HuliHuli]

17 hours ago, harkinmr said:

And I would credit this change to continuing dialogue between the cruise lines and the CDC outside of the public/media glare.

Please post the specific, first hand evidence you have to support your statement crediting "this change to continuing dialogue between the cruise lines and the CDC outside of the public/media glare."

[harkinmr]

6 minutes ago, HuliHuli said:

Please post the specific, first hand evidence you have to support your statement crediting "this change to continuing dialogue between the cruise lines and the CDC outside of the public/media glare."

Oh, please give me a break!  It was my personal assessment and opinion.  Just as valid as anyone else's.  

[HuliHuli]

1 hour ago, farmersfight said:

 

I agree. I think that DeSantis is over-reaching on this one. I don't understand why he "went to bat" for the cruise lines (by meeting with and hearing the CEOs) and then tries to throw up a big roadblock to their restart by prohibiting the cruise lines from requiring proof of covid vaccinations (i.e. covid vaccine passports).

I would not say that DeSantis is "over-reaching" or "went to bat" for the cruise lines.  Rather, I think he is endeavoring to support jobs for people of his State and the revenue cruising generates for the State.  That is common for Governors and politicians in general.

[HuliHuli]

6 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Oh, please give me a break!  It was my personal assessment and opinion.  Just as valid as anyone else's.  

Well, you challenged the factual basis of @BoozinCroozin's posting.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  IMHO, an opinion based on facts is far more valid.

[Stallion]

apparently Desantis hasn't read the Constitution:

United States Constitution Art. 1

Section 8.

The Congress shall have power ....

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;....

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Stallion

[harkinmr]

4 minutes ago, HuliHuli said:

Well, you challenged the factual basis of @BoozinCroozin's posting.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  IMHO, an opinion based on facts is far more valid.

Nope.  Didn't "challenge" his opinion.  Just offered my own.  His opinion was not based on "facts" at all.

[HuliHuli]

5 minutes ago, Stallion said:

apparently Desantis hasn't read the Constitution:

United States Constitution Art. 1

Section 8.

The Congress shall have power ....

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;....

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

True; The Congress has the power, not the CDC.  A CDC 'regulation' only has the force of law insofar as it conforms to the law Congress has written and the President has signed.  Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act directs that a reviewing court “shall hold unlawful and set aside” agency action “in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(C).  This is part of the State of Florida's case as raised by their reference to Skyworks, Ltd. v. CDC, 2021 WL 911720, at *10 (N.D. Ohio 2021)

[DCGuy64]

15 minutes ago, HuliHuli said:

Well, you challenged the factual basis of @BoozinCroozin's posting.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  IMHO, an opinion based on facts is far more valid.

Correct. There are opinions that are essentially just someone's gut feeling, and there are opinions backed up by fact. I prefer the latter. For one thing, it can be hard to distinguish fact from opinion when opinions are stated as though they were facts.

[KennyFla]

On 4/11/2021 at 7:10 AM, put me on a ship said:

Perhaps the politicians in Florida should FIX the unemployment system if they really cared.

I believe the people in charge in Florida believe everyone having a good job is better than people relying on a pittance from the gov't.

[DCGuy64]

And now Sens. Rubio and Scott get in on the act, along with Sen. Dan Sullivan of AK:

https://www.miamiherald.com/article250629204.html

"The Cruise Act would require the CDC to revoke their existing framework by July 4, which requires cruise companies to secure agreements with ports and local health authorities in the cities they plan to visit. Once the agreements are in place, cruise companies can begin test voyages before welcoming passengers on board."

 

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/article250629204.html#storylink=cpy

[Stallion]

9 minutes ago, HuliHuli said:

True; The Congress has the power, not the CDC.  A CDC 'regulation' only has the force of law insofar as it conforms to the law Congress has written and the President has signed.  Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act directs that a reviewing court “shall hold unlawful and set aside” agency action “in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(C).  This is part of the State of Florida's case as raised by their reference to Skyworks, Ltd. v. CDC, 2021 WL 911720, at *10 (N.D. Ohio 2021)

The case you cited doesn't mention or have a thing to do with the Interstate Commerce Clause or a state government's power to regulate interstate or international travel. It simply involves eviction law which is normally under the jurisdiction of state courts. The citation of this case shows the weakness of Florida's argument

[farmersfight]

1 hour ago, HuliHuli said:

I would not say that DeSantis is "over-reaching" or "went to bat" for the cruise lines.  Rather, I think he is endeavoring to support jobs for people of his State and the revenue cruising generates for the State.  That is common for Governors and politicians in general.

 

True. I should've said DeSantis "went to bat" for the Florida-based cruise-related businesses and the many Floridians employed by these businesses. By doing so, DeSantis was also helping out the cruise lines get restarted to bring these businesses back. Still goes back to my original question as to why DeSantis would then throw up a "road block" to the cruise lines' restart by prohibiting them from requiring all passengers be vaccinated. 🤔

[HuliHuli]

52 minutes ago, Stallion said:

The case you cited doesn't mention or have a thing to do with the Interstate Commerce Clause or a state government's power to regulate interstate or international travel. It simply involves eviction law which is normally under the jurisdiction of state courts. The citation of this case shows the weakness of Florida's argument

I agree the Skyworks, Ltd. case, at is core, was tied to an eviction law issue, but in that case Plaintiff asserted that the CDC had acted in a manner beyond that authorized by the Congress.  In the Florida case, the assertion is similar that "...neither 42 U.S.C. § 264 nor 42 C.F.R. § 70.2 authorizes the
CDC to make or enforce regulations that suspend the operation of cruise ships, much less every cruise ship in the country."  The question is, based upon a plain reading of the law, has the CDC exceeded its authority.  I won't debate it further, but I think the question is a good one, i.e., is the CDC out over the end of its skis in the orders it has issued.  I await to see what the courts decide.

[KennyFla]

12 minutes ago, farmersfight said:

 

True. I should've said DeSantis "went to bat" for the Florida-based cruise-related businesses and the many Floridians employed by these businesses. By doing so, DeSantis was also helping out the cruise lines get restarted to bring these businesses back. Still goes back to my original question as to why DeSantis would then throw up a "road block" to the cruise lines' restart by prohibiting them from requiring all passengers be vaccinated. 🤔

 

When push comes to shove, I don't think this will be  a deal breaker for him.   As was said in other posts, Florida does not have control over international cruises, if they did we would be cruising now.

[farmersfight]

1 hour ago, DCGuy64 said:

Correct. There are opinions that are essentially just someone's gut feeling, and there are opinions backed up by fact. I prefer the latter. For one thing, it can be hard to distinguish fact from opinion when opinions are stated as though they were facts.

 

Then there is the classic; "I believe in truth over facts". 🤣

[farmersfight]

1 hour ago, DCGuy64 said:

And now Sens. Rubio and Scott get in on the act, along with Sen. Dan Sullivan of AK:

https://www.miamiherald.com/article250629204.html

"The Cruise Act would require the CDC to revoke their existing framework by July 4, which requires cruise companies to secure agreements with ports and local health authorities in the cities they plan to visit. Once the agreements are in place, cruise companies can begin test voyages before welcoming passengers on board."

 

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/article250629204.html#storylink=cpy

 

Careful Resumption Under Improved Safety Enhancements or CRUISE Act. Those Republican senators are wordsmith geniuses. I'd hate to face off against one of them in a Scrabble game.

[Stallion]

43 minutes ago, HuliHuli said:

I agree the Skyworks, Ltd. case, at is core, was tied to an eviction law issue, but in that case Plaintiff asserted that the CDC had acted in a manner beyond that authorized by the Congress.  In the Florida case, the assertion is similar that "...neither 42 U.S.C. § 264 nor 42 C.F.R. § 70.2 authorizes the
CDC to make or enforce regulations that suspend the operation of cruise ships, much less every cruise ship in the country."  The question is, based upon a plain reading of the law, has the CDC exceeded its authority.  I won't debate it further, but I think the question is a good one, i.e., is the CDC out over the end of its skis in the orders it has issued.  I await to see what the courts decide.

These are two separate issues:

 

1. I am arguing that DeSantis does not have the power to issue an executive order prohibiting cruise companies from requiring vaccinations or vaccination cards as that area of the law is preempted by federal travel requirements;

2. Your argument concerns the subsequent lawsuit filed by Florida asserting that the CDC has exceeded its authority in issuing federal guidance on resumption of cruising. 

 

Two different issues. 

 

[HuliHuli]

36 minutes ago, Stallion said:

These are two separate issues:

 

1. I am arguing that DeSantis does not have the power to issue an executive order prohibiting cruise companies from requiring vaccinations or vaccination cards as that area of the law is preempted by federal travel requirements;

2. Your argument concerns the subsequent lawsuit filed by Florida asserting that the CDC has exceeded its authority in issuing federal guidance on resumption of cruising. 

 

Two different issues. 

 

Again I agree; those are two separate issues.  But the title of this thread is "DeSantis files suit against Biden Admin and the CDC."  That is what I've commented on from my first post, to which you responded.  So I think you are off topic on vaccination cards.  Maybe you should join the thread "Fla. says no to cruise line vaccine requirements."

Edited April 13, 2021 by HuliHuli
Added text

[DCGuy64]

I think it's worth considering the potential bully pulpit effect these kinds of announcements can have.

Even if, for the sake of argument, Gov DeSantis doesn't prevail on the merits of the case, the psychological effect of lawsuits might prompt the government to ease the restrictions anyway. A number of years ago I was part of an effort to stop a housing project from being built in our neighborhood, even though the owner of the parcel had the right to build something of that scale. The huge pushback from the neighborhood prompted the developer to make significant changes to the project. So even if a court ultimately tosses this challenge, if the CDC backs off (as it's already started to do, and don't even TRY to tell me it's a coincidence, not buying it), then the lawsuit will have had the necessary impact.

[mianmike]

6 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I don't know if the CDC and cruise lines are talking any more, or if anyone's position has changed any lately.  Everyone thinks the CDC's comment about "hopefully" cruising in July was a change in position, but the next part of their sentence was "under the requirements of the CSO", meaning that the CDC hoped the cruise lines would get their fingers out and meet the requirements so cruising could return in July.

 

My comment was based on this vlogger's discussion with a member of CLIA.  He claims CLIA and the CDC are talking.  The video should start where he mentions CLIA and the CDC.  

 

 

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, mianmike said:

 

My comment was based on this vlogger's discussion with a member of CLIA.  He claims CLIA and the CDC are talking.  The video should start where he mentions CLIA and the CDC.  

 

 

Sorry, we don't support video on our shipboard bandwidth.  I'll take your word for it, but whether those talks are "improved" by the threats and lawsuits, I'd be surprised.

[mianmike]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Sorry, we don't support video on our shipboard bandwidth.  I'll take your word for it, but whether those talks are "improved" by the threats and lawsuits, I'd be surprised.

 

Agree 100%.  Politicians threatening and filing lawsuits generally results in intransigence.   

[dswallow]

Florida filed a motion for Preliminary Injunction today.

(21.04.22_for filing) Cruise Draft PI Motion.docx (2150.com)

[At Sea At Peace]

49 minutes ago, dswallow said:

Florida filed a motion for Preliminary Injunction today.

(21.04.22_for filing) Cruise Draft PI Motion.docx (2150.com)

 

That's a really good read.  Thanks.

 

Best lines IMO.  Thereafter, some really good information on the original purpose of the CDC.

 

"this lockdown was not enacted pursuant to the State’s police power, by the United States Congress, or even by the politically accountable President. Rather, it was imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) pursuant to a limited delegation from Congress to inspect and disinfect property and animals. Congress did not, in granting those limited powers, authorize the CDC to shut down a multi-billion-dollar industry for over a year. The plain text of the CDC’s authority does not authorize these acts, even without applying the major-questions doctrine or clear-statement rule—both of which would apply to such radical power claimed by unaccountable federal bureaucrats. In any event, the CDC’s actions—including its refusal to account for vaccines, other interventions, and the success of cruise industries abroad during the pandemic—violate the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)."

 

"Much has changed since the CDC promulgated the Order in October 2020. First, multiple vaccines are now widely available. Over 50% of American adults have received one vaccine dose and 33% are fully vaccinated.1 And the CDC now admits that fully vaccinated people who cruise in other countries “do not need to self-quarantine after cruise travel.” Ex. 8 at 2.

 

1 CDC, COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States, https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-datatracker/#vaccinations (last visited April 22, 2021).

 

Second, the cruise industry is “stirring to life” abroad. Ex. 3 at 2. European and Asian cruises, for example, are reopening with “resounding success.” Ex. 7 at 6. Around 400,000 passengers have cruised “following stringent, science-based protocols that resulted in a far lower incident rate than on land.” Ex. 9 at 3; see also Ex. 10 at 6:14–18. In fact, the CDC recommends that passengers on those cruises follow safety protocols like social distancing, wearing masks, and handwashing. Ex. 8 at 3.

 

Third, other industries—such as airlines, bus lines, hotels, restaurants, universities, theme parks, casinos, and bars—have reopened without facing CDC lockdowns, even those that hold people in close quarters. For example, the CDC has not shut down the airline industry—focusing instead on “cleaning of aircraft” and “recommendations for hand hygiene.” Ex. 11 at 2–4.

 

 

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

That's a really good read.  Thanks.

 

Best lines IMO.  Thereafter, some really good information on the original purpose of the CDC.

 

"this lockdown was not enacted pursuant to the State’s police power, by the United States Congress, or even by the politically accountable President. Rather, it was imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) pursuant to a limited delegation from Congress to inspect and disinfect property and animals. Congress did not, in granting those limited powers, authorize the CDC to shut down a multi-billion-dollar industry for over a year. The plain text of the CDC’s authority does not authorize these acts, even without applying the major-questions doctrine or clear-statement rule—both of which would apply to such radical power claimed by unaccountable federal bureaucrats. In any event, the CDC’s actions—including its refusal to account for vaccines, other interventions, and the success of cruise industries abroad during the pandemic—violate the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)."

 

"Much has changed since the CDC promulgated the Order in October 2020. First, multiple vaccines are now widely available. Over 50% of American adults have received one vaccine dose and 33% are fully vaccinated.1 And the CDC now admits that fully vaccinated people who cruise in other countries “do not need to self-quarantine after cruise travel.” Ex. 8 at 2.

 

1 CDC, COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States, https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-datatracker/#vaccinations (last visited April 22, 2021).

 

Second, the cruise industry is “stirring to life” abroad. Ex. 3 at 2. European and Asian cruises, for example, are reopening with “resounding success.” Ex. 7 at 6. Around 400,000 passengers have cruised “following stringent, science-based protocols that resulted in a far lower incident rate than on land.” Ex. 9 at 3; see also Ex. 10 at 6:14–18. In fact, the CDC recommends that passengers on those cruises follow safety protocols like social distancing, wearing masks, and handwashing. Ex. 8 at 3.

 

Third, other industries—such as airlines, bus lines, hotels, restaurants, universities, theme parks, casinos, and bars—have reopened without facing CDC lockdowns, even those that hold people in close quarters. For example, the CDC has not shut down the airline industry—focusing instead on “cleaning of aircraft” and “recommendations for hand hygiene.” Ex. 11 at 2–4.

 

 

I'm still reading through it all, but I'd noticed those same sections, too, and thought it was a good idea to point them out. Thanks for doing so!

I think it would be very interesting (albeit purely speculative, on my part) if the CDC read through this and "coincidentally" began to quietly allow test cruises and updated its guidance to the cruise industry in a way that permitted sailings from the USA this summer.