Jump to content

Florida goes to the Supreme Court


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Not sure the CDC has the manpower or budget to do what you describe. If they do, then all I can say is our "tax dollars at work" and how they are wasted.

 

2 hours ago, ArthurUSCG said:

I believe the manpower would continue to fall on the USCG and CBP for the administration of the PHA.

Actually, the manpower would come first from the USPH Commissioned Corps, which supplies the inspectors for the CDC's VSP (which, conveniently, no one seems to have an issue with, and which is startingly similar to the CSO, hmmm).  The budget would come from the USPHS.  If there were manpower or budget shortages, that would just lead to longer quarantine waits for ships to be cleared.  Additional manpower could come from USCG and CBP, and even FDA inspectors, who do the same thing for US flag cruise ships as the USPH does for foreign ships.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if i'm reading correctly the CDC is saying to the cruise lines either play ball with us and ignore Florida's legal victories or we'll make your life more miserable through other means.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tree_skier said:

So if i'm reading correctly the CDC is saying to the cruise lines either play ball with us and ignore Florida's legal victories or we'll make your life more miserable through other means.

To quote another, the government doesn't like to lose.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dswallow said:

Completely separately, I really don't think that a cruise ship should be considered public transportation/conveyance in the same way trains and airlines and buses and ferries are considered. But that's another fight for another day. 🙂

 

Yep. 

 

Some in the general public that loathe everything about cruise lines and cruising will say that the cruise lines massive 'spread of spaces' is really not so, that such is a "close residential environment," and that it is now exactly the same, for CDC's retributory sandbox fit, as hours long, body-to-body contact on public transportation, trains, airlines, buses and ferries to support the 'transportation CDC overshight punitive angle.' 

 

The next thing to expect is that the CDC and related agencies don't have the manpower to timely perform their "enhanced new duties."  LOL.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we now finally dispense with the notion that the CDC isn't acting vindictively and arbitrarily.  They have shown their cards.  No matter the outcome of all the legal wrangling the Federal government will bring to heel all that dissent.  

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, drrich2 said:

Yes, and until Florida and Alaska really started turning up the political heat, the CDC wasn't doing that. The cruise lines were basically begging for realistic, practicable guidelines to restart cruising, and the CDC appeared to be giving them the brush off. 

And that was well after vaccines had become available in the U.S. Even if the CDC had said 'Okay, cruising is only okay with 100% vaccination rates and do a test cruise first,' prior to all that, at least it would've been something

So with some of us, the CDC bears the stigma of their obstructionism, which undermines what good faith/trust we might've otherwise regarded them with. 

I think it a fair statement that, for Florida, Alaska and the cruise industry, getting those options out of the CDC was, as they say, 'Like pulling teeth.'

The lawsuit by Florida was clever as I had said before.  It was the laxative needed to get s....stuff moving.  Not only did it work, it got what FL wanted all along which was tourism and the cruise industry back in business, with the added (intended?) benefit of sticking it up the CDCs smoketstack.  Many of you dont give RDS credit for this.  Very few saw it coming out this way.  [Pats self on back yet again.]👏👏👏🕺😉

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tree_skier said:

Can we now finally dispense with the notion that the CDC isn't acting vindictively and arbitrarily.  They have shown their cards.  No matter the outcome of all the legal wrangling the Federal government will bring to heel all that dissent.  

Hmmmm.  Im just a little more blunt in my own parlance  - well said.  [My arm is hurting though from patting myself on the back yet again for being right on this topic too.]

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pratique said:

EDIT to add, the court has just deferred Florida's motion until there is evidence of a violation of the injunction.

 

Always good to have evidence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Florida wanted the CSO enjoined. The CDC is still responsible for public health on small and large ships arriving in US ports. What did Florida expect, to be able to rewrite fed regs as they please? CSO goes kaput so back to other applicable laws.

Edited by mayleeman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@chengkp75 Question: Have you heard any feedback from the cargo industry about the attempt by Florida to argue, and the judge's ruling, that the whole VSP/inspection/quarantine protocol is a CDC overreach not authorized by law (not just the CSO)?

Edited by mayleeman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, At Sea At Peace said:

SOP, all parties with qualified counsel play-the-hand.  In the current three cases, all parties have done the same.  It is what it is.

Difference between playing the hand and overplaying the hand. The judge was not buying Florida's story today.

 

1 hour ago, At Sea At Peace said:

To assume that there is not dialogue...

It's a safe assumption.

 

1 hour ago, At Sea At Peace said:

As the CDC/HHS/US have already used the cruise lines for 16 months?

So that makes it OK for Florida to do it too? I thought the state was trying to help the cruise lines. All of this legal wrangling is not helping. Now the cruise lines and CDC need to walk on eggshells lest Florida come back with a renewed motion for sanctions because the phrasing of the CDC communications isn't good enough.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tippyton said:

The lawsuit by Florida was clever as I had said before.  It was the laxative needed to get s....stuff moving.  Not only did it work, it got what FL wanted all along which was tourism and the cruise industry back in business, with the added (intended?) benefit of sticking it up the CDCs smoketstack.  Many of you dont give RDS credit for this.  Very few saw it coming out this way.  [Pats self on back yet again.]👏👏👏🕺😉

 

NOPE.  They were ready to move anyway and now all DeSantis is doing is muddying the waters, fighting himself.  It's bizarre.  

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

Florida wanted the CSO enjoined. The CDC is still responsible for public health on small and large ships arriving in US ports. What did Florida expect, to be able to rewrite fed regs as they please? CSO goes kaput so back to other applicable laws.

Florida is also responsible for public health. They said so in their original complaint (below). "Be careful what you ask for, because you might just get it."

 

"Sections 264 and 70.2 permit the CDC to act only if it first “determines that the measures taken by” a state “are insufficient to prevent the spread” of a communicable disease “from such State . . . to any other State.” 42 C.F.R. § 70.2. But here, the CDC has made no valid determination that the measures taken by Florida to protect the health and safety of its residents and tourists are insufficient. And any such determination would have to first take into account that people are now traveling with protective measures like vaccines, sanitation, and social distancing, and that the cruise industry has safely and successfully resumed sailing outside of U.S. waters."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tippyton said:

The lawsuit by Florida was clever as I had said before.  It was the laxative needed to get s....stuff moving.  Not only did it work, it got what FL wanted all along which was tourism and the cruise industry back in business, with the added (intended?) benefit of sticking it up the CDCs smoketstack.  Many of you dont give RDS credit for this.  Very few saw it coming out this way.  [Pats self on back yet again.]👏👏👏🕺😉

Alaska got what it wanted through Congress. How come Florida wasn't that clever?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pratique said:

Florida is also responsible for public health. They said so in their original complaint (below). "Be careful what you ask for, because you might just get it."

 

"Sections 264 and 70.2 permit the CDC to act only if it first “determines that the measures taken by” a state “are insufficient to prevent the spread” of a communicable disease “from such State . . . to any other State.” 42 C.F.R. § 70.2. But here, the CDC has made no valid determination that the measures taken by Florida to protect the health and safety of its residents and tourists are insufficient. And any such determination would have to first take into account that people are now traveling with protective measures like vaccines, sanitation, and social distancing, and that the cruise industry has safely and successfully resumed sailing outside of U.S. waters."

 

The quoted section reads as if it applies to interstate considerations, allowing CDC to act if it determines a state is not doing enough to protect its citizens or protect a contagion from spreading to another state.

 

I am just going by your selection, but that doesn't apply to the federal jurisdiction over ships entering US waters, does it?

 

States are not responsible for any of the public health inspections and standards until a ship docks, unless I am wrong (managed to avoid Maritime Law; only FL and Maine required it, AFAIK!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

 

The quoted section reads as if it applies to interstate considerations, allowing CDC to act if it determines a state is not doing enough to protect its citizens or protect a contagion from spreading to another state.

 

I am just going by your selection, but that doesn't apply to the federal jurisdiction over ships entering US waters, does it?

 

States are not responsible for any of the public health inspections and standards until a ship docks, unless I am wrong (managed to avoid Maritime Law; only FL and Maine required it, AFAIK!).

Florida wants TOURISM. TOURISM = interstate travel, and in Florida's case, lots of it. If Florida wants the responsibility of dealing with out-of-state Covid-infected passengers arriving at its ports, then they can have at it. There was a study done of tracking cell phones from spring break back across the country. People who congregated on Florida's beaches then traveled far and wide. There's a case to be made that the state's efforts were insufficient.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pratique said:

Florida wants TOURISM. TOURISM = interstate travel, and in Florida's case, lots of it. If Florida wants the responsibility of dealing with out-of-state Covid-infected passengers arriving at its ports, then they can have at it. There was a study done of tracking cell phones from spring break back across the country. People who congregated on Florida's beaches then traveled far and wide. There's a case to be made that the state's efforts were insufficient.

 

That would be easy to prove, but is still irrelevant to ships entering (or leaving) Florida ports, where jurisdiction does not depend on a showing of inadequacy.

 

Furthermore, doesn't it seem that any failure to protect spread from the tourism travel examples you gave would fail if used to justify CDC action on cruising standards? Because there weren't cases of covid spreading on/from Florida cruises were there? The cessation of sailing in Mar 2020 thankfully prevented that. It might well have blown FL out of the court, though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

 

That would be easy to prove, but is still irrelevant to ships entering (or leaving) Florida ports, where jurisdiction does not depend on a showing of inadequacy.

 

Furthermore, doesn't it seem that any failure to protect spread from the tourism travel examples you gave would fail if used to justify CDC action on cruising standards? Because there weren't cases of covid spreading on/from Florida cruises were there? The cessation of sailing in Mar 2020 thankfully prevented that. It might well have blown FL out of the court, though!

Florida must think it is relevant because they said it in the part I quoted, and the judge agreed with them (that CDC didn't make a showing of inadequacy). And the moment that the CDC sent the "dear colleague" letter to the cruise lines saying that the CSO was now voluntary, Florida ran to court and asked for a contempt hearing.

 

My point is that if Florida now wants the CDC to let go of the CSO and totally back off of the cruise lines, then who will be to blame if things go south. Florida said it has stepped up and taken responsibility and that the CSO is unnecessary to protect public health. Then so be it. Maybe everything will work out, cross our fingers. But right now it's still very risky for the cruise lines with the rising case numbers among unvaccinated people, and a bad time to be dropping guard.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pratique said:

right now it's still very risky for the cruise lines with the rising case numbers among unvaccinated people, and a bad time to be dropping guard.

 

All across the country, sadly enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pratique said:

And yet the injunction only applies to Florida. Go figure.

An injunction that has no practical value since the cruise lines are bullied by the CDC to comply anyways.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Pratique said:

Florida must think it is relevant because they said it in the part I quoted, and the judge agreed with them (that CDC didn't make a showing of inadequacy). And the moment that the CDC sent the "dear colleague" letter to the cruise lines saying that the CSO was now voluntary, Florida ran to court and asked for a contempt hearing.

 

My point is that if Florida now wants the CDC to let go of the CSO and totally back off of the cruise lines, then who will be to blame if things go south. Florida said it has stepped up and taken responsibility and that the CSO is unnecessary to protect public health. Then so be it. Maybe everything will work out, cross our fingers. But right now it's still very risky for the cruise lines with the rising case numbers among unvaccinated people, and a bad time to be dropping guard.


In what way has Florida stepped up and taken responsibility for public health regarding cruising? I am not aware of anything except the prohibition of inquiring about vaccine status in order to deny service. How does that protect public health?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, kearney said:

I really am not concerned about being around unvaccinated..but I do mind tight masking requirements indoors. I don't want to pay to have less freedom than I do at home.

Neither am I concerned about bring around unvaccinated people. I am concerned about having to wear a mask in order to protect them because they refuse to take steps to protect themselves.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, mayleeman said:

@chengkp75 Question: Have you heard any feedback from the cargo industry about the attempt by Florida to argue, and the judge's ruling, that the whole VSP/inspection/quarantine protocol is a CDC overreach not authorized by law (not just the CSO)?

Nothing in the Florida law, or the VSP/CSO, or anything is an issue for other than passenger vessels.  Every ship wishing to enter US waters (and even US flag coastwise shipping) still need to submit a Master's Attestation of Health to the USCG, who forwards it to the CDC, and then gives the ship clearance.  For cargo ships, CBP has their own health officers that do the sanitation inspections, and health interviews on a random basis, and can quarantine a vessel if required.  Nothing in all of this is applicable to cargo vessels.

 

However, the USCG issued a mask mandate for all US flag vessels a few months back, since amended as per CDC guidelines.  Under 42USC268, USCG officers are mandated to assist in enforcement of quarantine regulations.

Edited by chengkp75
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Actually, the manpower would come first from the USPH Commissioned Corps, which supplies the inspectors for the CDC's VSP (which, conveniently, no one seems to have an issue with, and which is startingly similar to the CSO, hmmm).  The budget would come from the USPHS.  If there were manpower or budget shortages, that would just lead to longer quarantine waits for ships to be cleared.  Additional manpower could come from USCG and CBP, and even FDA inspectors, who do the same thing for US flag cruise ships as the USPH does for foreign ships.

 

You're mischaracterizing the argument. They are different. The cruise lines simply are not transportation conveyances in any way like airlines, trains, buses or ferryboats. The cruise ships are vacation destinations that happen to move, too.

But the argument over the draconian CDC behavior with regard to cruise ships was always that they placed almost no controls whatsoever on any real transportation conveyances; no testing, no vaccination requirements, no rules to clean airliners/trains/buses if later someone was found testing positive. And they were never shut down for 18 months. Nothing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Virgin Voyages. It's Go Time
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...