Florida wins so Carnival can sail with kids

[stellarose]

agreed. I want as normal as possible and wearing a mask on the ship is not normal.  im vaccinated- let me not wear on on vacay. 

[Heartgrove]

8 minutes ago, BoozinCroozin said:

I agree with you and I partially mis-spoke. Yes, they need negative PCR tests to land in the US. I know that many countries PCR test are no where near the quality in the US. Plus, those countries don't want an infected person staying, so they just give a passing test. Also, it is not the airlines giving the test like the cruise lines will have to. There is a big difference still.

 

What? How do you know that they are lesser quality than PCR tests here in the USA? I seriously doubt that other countries would provide a false test result just to have the visitor leave.

 

And who says that the cruise line will need to provide the test for the passenger? If the judge wants the cruise lines to have similar enforcement as planes, trains, and buses then the CDC could change their game plan to "conform."

[BoozinCroozin]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

If anyone believes that the cruise lines will give any more than lip service to "vaccinated cruises" after this ruling, you're living in an alternate reality.  They will go with voluntary statements regarding vaccination, and hope nothing happens.  As they always have.

Exactly, this ruling from my brief understanding, is that the CDC has nothing to do with cruising anymore.

[naxer]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

If anyone believes that the cruise lines will give any more than lip service to "vaccinated cruises" after this ruling, you're living in an alternate reality.  They will go with voluntary statements regarding vaccination, and hope nothing happens.  As they always have.

I think the important question is what will they do when "it" inevitably happens.  I think they'll figure out ways to make it work and try to keep the cruise as normal as possible.  We've come a long way in 15 months, and as there have been sailings, and people have tested positive for covid on them, it seems they have figured out ways to manage it.  

[kdr69]

13 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

and, of course, port agreements are now up in the air, and ports could require everyone to be vaccinated or tested at the port. Limit shore excursions. Etc.

Given that there are already port agreements in place that do NOT require this i highly doubt they would turn around and create new agreements to include such items.

[kdr69]

12 hours ago, MrMarc said:

r example, here a Court is limiting the CDC, what happens in the next pandemic? 

The only limiting i see is a restriction from going outside the scope of the legislation that they operate under.  They are perfectly and completely able to come up with guidelines and recommendations as they do for all other industries as per the Judges findings.

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, BoozinCroozin said:

Exactly, this ruling from my brief understanding, is that the CDC has nothing to do with cruising anymore.

Well, from my reading, the judge is quite ambivalent on that.  He does acknowledge the federal government's, and CDC's, authority to issue "free pratique" (and this is for any ship, whether cruise or cargo) for ships wishing to enter or operate in US waters, and to issue regulations regarding that "free pratique", but he muddies it by saying that future requirements from the CDC, at least with regards to covid, will be "non-binding".  I think he disagrees with aspects of the CSO, but does not want to get into the science or financial details of which he feels are burdensome, so he just throws the baby out with the bathwater, hoping things will be clarified by another court.

[AnitaVacation]

This is ridiculous and changing everyday.  Getting on a cruise ship with 5000 +/- other people is not like a day at Disney where you can be outside or getting on a flight for a few hours.  It's more like being shut inside a hotel for a week and not being able to leave.  Throw in some unvaccinated guests, possibly carrying the virus (it only takes one) and just like norovirus, that crap is everywhere, no amount of cleaning will completely wipe it away.  So, they put special restrictions on the 'unvaxxed' passengers....how long before a fight breaks out because someone didn't wear a mask or got too close or didn't follow the rules.  Also, with the new variants making the rounds, what port is going to welcome unvaxxed passengers?? 1.DeSantis is wrong  2. Cruise lines need to make their own rules.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A FOREVER THING.....just a necessary step in the right direction!!

[kdr69]

12 hours ago, caniuseit said:

do you sincerely believe that on a ship with 5000 passengers with 2500 unvaccinated that there will not be an outbreak?

Given that the CDC defines an outbreak as 1 person as mentioned in the Judges findings i sincerely doubt there WOULDNT be an outbreak.  That being said barring a crystal ball as to how many people on the ship actually were unvaccinated any comment on my part as to what could or could not happen on a particular cruise since not all ships carry 5000 passengers would be the same equating that the CDC is doing to an entire class of vessels vs individual vessels that may or may not have an issue. 

[balcony bound]

14 minutes ago, AnitaVacation said:

T 1.DeSantis is wrong  2. Cruise lines need to make their own rules.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A FOREVER THING.....just a necessary step in the right direction!!

 

Wrong, or helpful?

 

"Christine Duffy is therefore appreciative of governor DeSantis’s lawsuit against the CDC, as it will hopefully call for the CDC to move up their timelines or drop the CSO entirely."

Edited June 19, 2021 by balcony bound
punctuation

[kdr69]

12 hours ago, bdever said:

TNcruising02, the problem becomes the problem when all of the non-socially distanced, non-vaccinated strangers exit the buses, airports, trains, terminals, and plans to board the same cruise ships unfortunately.

I respectfully disagree.  The problem was a problem long before they even got to the cruise ship. If you basically look the other way until then should it all fall on the one mode of transportation to remedy the problem?  I say was because in my opinion its not as big a problem anymore with increasing numbers of vaccinations.  

[kdr69]

12 hours ago, caniuseit said:

They are forbidden to mandate ANY vaccines.

They are legally required to not ask for proof that is not the same as not requiring vaccines.

[jimbo5544]

36 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

If anyone believes that the cruise lines will give any more than lip service to "vaccinated cruises" after this ruling, you're living in an alternate reality.  They will go with voluntary statements regarding vaccination, and hope nothing happens.  As they always have.

Hope springs eternal.  As Tug Mcgraw uses to say, “you gotta believe”.  They have a lot at stake here.  

[caniuseit]

51 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I would wager they already have a workaround

Yup

 

the cruise lines can make it cost/inconvenient days prohibitive to NOT show vax documentation

 

one thing that I have not seen discussed

if There is a mask mandate for the unvaxxed how many knock down drag out fights will there be?  It is already crazy town over masks on planes etc.

[kdr69]

12 hours ago, caniuseit said:

So, let me see if I understand

 

A 20 minute taxi or Uber ride with 3 people should be treated like a 4 hour plane ride with 300 people. Thats  not different than a ship with 5000 people together for 7 days?
 

did you forget what happened last year when there was an outbreak on a cruise ship?  The ship OWNED those passengers until they could get them off the boat?

 

sorry, but wanting to treat them the same is ludicrous 

 

the likelihood of exposure on a plane ride would probably be the same ratio as your 3 to 4 taxi example since it would most likely be people within a few seats exposed vs the entire plane and given that you are not taking into consideration the number of vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals on the ship and that you are utilizing an example "like the CDC" for what happened pre vaccine to what current science shows us on spread post vaccine i dont agree with your argument.  What was then is not what is now.

[caniuseit]

59 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Despite posts to the contrary, it is without doubt the CDC WAY overstepped.  We now have a federal judge who had the guts to agree.  IF the CDC had truly acted in the best interest of ALL of us, we would be talking about cruise experiences again.  

And if Florida had not denied the ability to require the Vax the path forward would be simple and clear. 
I’m curios as to why you give Florida/DeSantis a pass?

[kdr69]

14 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

Cruise lines still can set their own rules.

I agree and believe they will set guidelines 

[jimbo5544]

Just now, caniuseit said:

Yup

 

the cruise lines can make it cost/inconvenient days prohibitive to NOT show vax documentation

 

one thing that I have not seen discussed

if There is a mask mandate for the unvaxxed how many knock down drag out fights will there be?  It is already crazy town over masks on planes etc.

I agree.   The mask issue needs to be worked out.

[kdr69]

10 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

I guess you didn't. The judge referenced cruises currently happening several times. These provide current data the judge is looking for. The judge won't argue with success.

 

The suit isn't over. The judge is giving the CDC a do over and even telling them how to do it.

Agreed.  And as a responsible individual whos actions affect others around me i will follow all recommended "Guidelines" such as wearing a mask when and where necessary, getting vaccinated to reduce spread, social distancing where required and sanitizing my hands. 

[jimbo5544]

8 minutes ago, Tom-n-Cheryl said:

 

Two men enter, one man leaves.

 

On second thought, scratch that...

 

Tom

 Vague, but I get it.  It may be we have vaccinated and non vaccinated cruises for a while. 

[kdr69]

6 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

If they simply "return to normal" the outcome is pretty predictable.

If by that you mean there will be instances of infection i agree, since that is what is currently happening.  But instances that will be entirely manageable as is currently being proven by Cruise ships currently operating.

[kdr69]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Not sure where the judge draws the line on what is burdensome, covid requirements, or the design and construction of the entire food service, laundry, child care, and recreational water facilities on a cruise ship.

I think the Judge certainly referred to the line when he said the following....

 

Never has CDC (or a predecessor) detained a vessel for more than fifteen months; never has CDC implemented a widespread or industry-wide detention of a fleet of vessels in American waters; never has CDC conditioned pratique as extensively and burdensomely as the conditional sailing order; and never has CDC imposed restrictions that have summarily dismissed the effectiveness of state regulation and halted for an extended time an entire multi-billion dollar industry nationwide. In a word, never has CDC implemented measures as extensive, disabling, and exclusive as those under review in this action.

 

[kdr69]

56 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

so he just throws the baby out with the bathwater, hoping things will be clarified by another court.

I dont believe he threw anything out.  He specifically gave them until July 2nd to come up with guidelines and recommendations in keeping with those currently being applied to other industries.  Ii think this gives the CDC an opportunity to amend the current CSO and work with the Cruise lines on protocols that are acceptable to all parties and not draconian in nature as they are now.

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, kdr69 said:

I think the Judge certainly referred to the line when he said the following....

 

Never has CDC (or a predecessor) detained a vessel for more than fifteen months; never has CDC implemented a widespread or industry-wide detention of a fleet of vessels in American waters; never has CDC conditioned pratique as extensively and burdensomely as the conditional sailing order; and never has CDC imposed restrictions that have summarily dismissed the effectiveness of state regulation and halted for an extended time an entire multi-billion dollar industry nationwide. In a word, never has CDC implemented measures as extensive, disabling, and exclusive as those under review in this action.

 

The CDC did "detain" vessels for 8 months, not 15 (the length of the "no sail order", but during the "no sail order" the way to obtain "free pratique" was available to the cruise lines, as outlined in the April 2020 amendment, where the lines were given the opportunity to submit an application for "free pratique" which could have been granted to individual ships or lines on a case by case basis.  The ships could have been sailing long ago, under the same conditions that the lines are currently working with.  

[chengkp75]

5 minutes ago, kdr69 said:

I dont believe he threw anything out.  He specifically gave them until July 2nd to come up with guidelines and recommendations in keeping with those currently being applied to other industries.  Ii think this gives the CDC an opportunity to amend the current CSO and work with the Cruise lines on protocols that are acceptable to all parties and not draconian in nature as they are now.

Actually, he says that any future requirements submitted by July will be "recommendations" only, and "non-binding" on the cruise lines, even requirements worked out with the cruise lines.  He has essentially thrown out the authority to set public health requirements for "free pratique" that he previously acknowledged was within the CDC's jurisdiction.