View Point: "Why the State of Florida Will Lose its Motion for Preliminary Injunction Against the CDC"

[Stallion]

https://www.cruiselawnews.com/2021/05/articles/disease/why-the-state-of-florida-will-lose-its-motion-for-preliminary-injunction-against-the-cdc-tomorrow/

[harkinmr]

I think this is a tough argument for Florida to get past. It’s a bit late in the game guys. But hey, it works politically right?

 

2.   Florida Unreasonably Delayed Claiming That The CDC’s Order Irreparable Harmed It 

Secondly, the state of Florida unreasonably delayed seeking to prohibit the CDC from restricting cruise operations.  The CDC argues that Florida “sat on its supposed rights for well over a year while cruise ship operations were restricted. It cannot now establish that irreparable harm would be prevented by letting cruise ships resume operations slightly more quickly than CDC believes is necessary to protect the public’s health.” The idea of a preliminary injunction is premised on the need for speedy and urgent action to “protect a party’s rights before a case can be resolved on its merits.”  Florida seeks to preliminarily enjoin the CDC from enforcing its conditional sailing order, but it “offers no explanation why it waited nearly six months after the temporary emergency order was issued” (October 1, 2020) to seek judicial review. The CDC makes a compelling case that Florida not only waited too long to bring legal action, but it failed to establish that it suffered actual “irreparable harm” which would justify the “extraordinary and drastic remedy” of a preliminary injunction,

[chengkp75]

As much as I dislike Walker, he does know which cases will win, and which cases to walk away from.

 

I found it interesting that the CDC has officially rebutted CLIA's covid numbers in court documents.

[KennyFla]

8 hours ago, harkinmr said:

I think this is a tough argument for Florida to get past. It’s a bit late in the game guys. But hey, it works politically right?

 

2.   Florida Unreasonably Delayed Claiming That The CDC’s Order Irreparable Harmed It 

Secondly, the state of Florida unreasonably delayed seeking to prohibit the CDC from restricting cruise operations.  The CDC argues that Florida “sat on its supposed rights for well over a year while cruise ship operations were restricted. It cannot now establish that irreparable harm would be prevented by letting cruise ships resume operations slightly more quickly than CDC believes is necessary to protect the public’s health.” The idea of a preliminary injunction is premised on the need for speedy and urgent action to “protect a party’s rights before a case can be resolved on its merits.”  Florida seeks to preliminarily enjoin the CDC from enforcing its conditional sailing order, but it “offers no explanation why it waited nearly six months after the temporary emergency order was issued” (October 1, 2020) to seek judicial review. The CDC makes a compelling case that Florida not only waited too long to bring legal action, but it failed to establish that it suffered actual “irreparable harm” which would justify the “extraordinary and drastic remedy” of a preliminary injunction,

 

I don't understand this.  Florida continues to suffer harm, doesn't that count for anything.  This is being looked at like it is a past event.  It is still going on.

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, KennyFla said:

 

I don't understand this.  Florida continues to suffer harm, doesn't that count for anything.  This is being looked at like it is a past event.  It is still going on.

Florida does not suffer harm, some individuals and corporations may, but they are not party to the suit.

[At Sea At Peace]

Although I don't expect a favorable ruling for Florida at this time, I fully believe this was influential in getting the CDC to get off its butt.

 

Not surprised by the CDC relying on the two Princess cruises, ignoring the concept of vaccinated crew and passengers, and ignoring the successful European and Asian cruises since last year (as if they never existed) and the resulting positive cases (with no severity) of a miniscule % per person than land-based experience rates.

 

The CDC continues to be ridiculed, even by the NY Times, for its terrible intentional disinformation.  At come point that has to have consequences.  Further, if blindness and turning the other cheek to 175,000 a month at the southern border under the same public health and safety regarding Covid-19 just adds to the aura of their disingenuous and inconsistent guidance and mandates. 

 

I also found the linked article to be one sided in presenting an outline of the briefs of each party with very little from the Florida filing.

 

Again, I don't expect a favorable ruling for Florida at this time.

 

[KennyFla]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Florida does not suffer harm, some individuals and corporations may, but they are not party to the suit.

Florida was getting sales tax on provisions, as well as tourism taxes on cruisers, not having to pay unemployment to all idle workers.

[harkinmr]

5 minutes ago, KennyFla said:

 

I don't understand this.  Florida continues to suffer harm, doesn't that count for anything.  This is being looked at like it is a past event.  It is still going on.

That is the point. It is a past event. The industry was shut down by the CDC last March. Any alleged financial harm to Florida started then and has been continuing. The state could have brought a suit claiming lack of authority and irreparable harm last Spring, Fall or through the Winter. They chose not to.  My guess is because it was not politically expedient.  It’s most enlightening to note that none of the cruise lines, who are the parties directly harmed by the shutdown, have joined in the lawsuit. They instead are working with the CDC on a restart.  

[KennyFla]

2 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

That is the point. It is a past event. The industry was shut down by the CDC last March. Any alleged financial harm to Florida started then and has been continuing. The state could have brought a suit claiming lack of authority and irreparable harm last Spring, Fall or through the Winter. They chose not to.  My guess is because it was not politically expedient.  It’s most enlightening to note that none of the cruise lines, who are the parties directly harmed by the shutdown, have joined in the lawsuit. They instead are working with the CDC on a restart.  

The state and the cruise lines have been negotiating in good faith with the CDC all this time.  They finally realized that was going nowhere.

Edited May 12, 2021 by KennyFla

[njhorseman]

1 minute ago, KennyFla said:

The state and the cruise lines have been negotiating in good faith with the CDC all this time.  They finally realized that was going nowhere.

The state has never negotiated with the CDC about cruise resumption and the cruise lines only started doing so very recently.

[At Sea At Peace]

4 minutes ago, KennyFla said:

Florida was getting sales tax on provisions, as well as tourism taxes on cruisers, not having to pay unemployment to all idle workers.

 

Regarding the single aspect of the case (and there are numerous other aspects) dealing with irreparable harm to Florida, those that are countering that Florida has not been harmed just don't understand economic basics and/or have not read the original Complaint and the Motion by the State of Florida or simply are in the CDC's corner of not wanting the cruise lines to even sail again.

 

From the Complaint ~

 

 

 

 

 

From the Motion (Exhibit referenced)

 

[KennyFla]

1 minute ago, njhorseman said:

The state has never negotiated with the CDC about cruise resumption and the cruise lines only started doing so very recently.

Not sure about the first part of your statement, but the second part is incorrect.

[njhorseman]

Just now, KennyFla said:

Not sure about the first part of your statement, but the second part is incorrect.

You're wrong. For months and months the cruise industry announced repeated voluntary suspensions of cruising and after the CDC issued the Conditional Sail Order to replace the prior No Sail Order the cruise lines made no attempt to issue formal plans to comply until recently.

[harkinmr]

8 minutes ago, KennyFla said:

The state and the cruise lines have been negotiating in good faith with the CDC all this time.  They finally realized that was going nowhere.

Njhorseman above is correct. The state has not been in direct discussions with the CDC about a cruise restart.  The cruise lines are, but only just “realized” that the CSO is not going away and they have no choice.  And again, the cruise lines are not even a party to the lawsuit. That is very telling. 

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

As much as I dislike Walker, he does know which cases will win, and which cases to walk away from.

 

I found it interesting that the CDC has officially rebutted CLIA's covid numbers in court documents.

Aren't all these lawsuits just running the risk of the CDC extending the no sail order perhaps for another 12 months or 2 years or however long? After all the courts would likely side with them wouldn't they?

[logan25]

2 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Aren't all these lawsuits just running the risk of the CDC extending the no sail order perhaps for another 12 months or 2 years or however long? After all the courts would likely side with them wouldn't they?

IMO the CDC is already under no obligation to let the CSO expire.  Just because that is the current does not mean it shall remain.  CDC could extend indefinitely.

[harkinmr]

1 minute ago, ace2542 said:

Aren't all these lawsuits just running the risk of the CDC extending the no sail order perhaps for another 12 months or 2 years or however long? After all the courts would likely side with them wouldn't they?

If you’re talking about some sort of retaliation, no.  There is absolutely nothing in it for the CDC. The CSO will expire on November 1 (barring something catastrophic) if not before that with HHS dropping the public health emergency. 

[ace2542]

15 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

And again, the cruise lines are not even a party to the lawsuit. That is very telling. 

The cruise lines don't want to rock the boat do they? No pun intended in that remark. I am sure they realise if they attempt to take on the CDC they would lose very badly. I am sure CDC could do a number of things.

[harkinmr]

Just now, ace2542 said:

The cruise lines don't want to rock the boat do they? No pun intended in that remark. I am sure they realise if they attempt to take on the CDC they would lose very badly. I am sure CDC could do a number of things.

As I’ve said, it is telling that they did not join the lawsuit. 

[At Sea At Peace]

18 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Njhorseman above is correct. The state has not been in direct discussions with the CDC about a cruise restart.  The cruise lines are, but only just “realized” that the CSO is not going away and they have no choice.  And again, the cruise lines are not even a party to the lawsuit. That is very telling. 

 

Florida, specifically DeSantis, worked publicly with the then Vice President and the CDC Director as early as March of 2020 to assess the pandemics consequences to the cruise industry.  They continued their efforts through late October and it is reported that Pence overruled the CDC recommendation to extend the No Sail Order.  Post election, and replacement of CDC Director, it doesn't appear that there were any public efforts jointly.

 

 

IMO, the cruise lines haven't joined the suit for good reason.  In todays tyranny of governmental and political overreach, the blowback would be severe.  

 

[harkinmr]

1 minute ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

Florida, specifically DeSantis, worked publicly with the then Vice President and the CDC Director as early as March of 2020 to assess the pandemics consequences to the cruise industry.  They continued their efforts through late October and it is reported that Pence overruled the CDC recommendation to extend the No Sail Order.  Post election, and replacement of CDC Director, it doesn't appear that there were any public efforts jointly.

 

 

IMO, the cruise lines haven't joined the suit for good reason.  In todays tyranny of governmental and political overreach, the blowback would be severe.  

 

The meeting in the photo was DeSantis meeting with cruise line heads and Pence.  The state was not in any direct discussions with the CDC.  It’s kind of amusing that Pence overrode the NSO extension, which only served to bring in the CSO expanding the CDC’s ability to oversee the restart. Not a great move in hindsight. 

[ace2542]

5 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

There is absolutely nothing in it for the CDC

Apart from protecting the health of and slowing the spread of illness in the United States. Correct me if I am wrong but I cannot think of another setting in which 6500 people spend 7 or 14 days together in a however large a cruise ship is in area in which colds and flu and other illness spread among all those people apart from a cruise ship.

[DCGuy64]

This "article" is nothing but another sleazy hit job against the cruise industry. The website's "motto" is "Everything Cruise Lines Don't Want You To Know." That's the kind of verbiage used by ambulance chaser lawyers with their "1-800-BAD-DRUG" late-night commercials. Please. How about an analysis from a legal expert WITHOUT an axe to grind?

I did read the article, and it is very interesting. I can't speak to whether Florida lacks standing. The legal merits of the case are one thing, but this author's take on everything is suspect from the get-go. For one thing, he again parrots the same tired BS about cruise ships being particularly suited to the transmission of illness. Sorry, but that is SO pre-Covid. He mentions the once-in-a-century pandemic and the number of lives taken, etc., all of which is true. BUT SO IS THE INDUSTRY'S RESPONSE, and that he addresses barely. It is nothing short of duplicitous to point out the supposed failures of the industry (in which he hearkens again back to March 2020) but not to acknowledge a) the efforts by the cruise industry to keep people safe nor b) the lack of widespread outbreaks onboard any of the vessels that have sailed since last year. He does the classic apples vs oranges thing of comparing a short, 2-hour flight to a long cruise with thousands of unvaccinated people crammed together. Considering the vaccinations we've had, the capacity requirements, the social distancing, the temperature checks, the cruiseline-sponsored excursions, and the enhanced cleaning and fresh air protocols (none of which he bothers to mention, how convenient), it's clear he doesn't understand the subject matter. This guy has an agenda, and it's clear from the outset he hates the industry. I am not particularly hopeful about the outcome of this lawsuit for various reasons. For one thing, and here I agree with the author, the representatives of the major cruise lines have not joined it. Maybe that's because they don't want to make enemies of the CDC, I don't know. But I do think that's significant. Nonetheless, it's disappointing to read something that the OP @Stallion clearly wants people to believe is some objective, sober legal analysis of this case, when it's nothing but a hit job by a cruise industry hater. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

Edited May 12, 2021 by DCGuy64

[harkinmr]

9 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

This "article" is nothing but another sleazy hit job against the cruise industry. The website's "motto" is "Everything Cruise Lines Don't Want You To Know." That's the kind of verbiage used by ambulance chaser lawyers with their "1-800-BAD-DRUG" late-night commercials. Please. How about an analysis from a legal expert WITHOUT an axe to grind?

I did read the article, and it is very interesting. I can't speak to whether Florida lacks standing. The legal merits of the case are one thing, but this author's take on everything is suspect from the get-go. For one thing, he again parrots the same tired BS about cruise ships being particularly suited to the transmission of illness. Sorry, but that is SO pre-Covid. He mentions the once-in-a-century pandemic and the number of lives taken, etc., all of which is true. BUT SO IS THE INDUSTRY'S RESPONSE, and that he addresses barely. It is nothing short of duplicitous to point out the supposed failures of the industry (in which he hearkens again back to March 2020) but not to acknowledge a) the efforts by the cruise industry to keep people safe nor b) the lack of widespread outbreaks onboard any of the vessels that have sailed since last year. He does the classic apples vs oranges thing of comparing a short, 2-hour flight to a long cruise with thousands of unvaccinated people crammed together. Consider the vaccinations we've had, the capacity requirements, the social distancing, the temperature checks, the cruiseline-sponsored excursions, and the enhanced cleaning and fresh air protocols (none of which he bothers to mention, how convenient), it's clear he doesn't understand the subject matter. This guy has an agenda, and it's clear from the outset he hates the industry. I am not particularly hopeful about the outcome of this lawsuit for various reasons. For one thing, and here I agree with the author, the representatives of the major cruise lines have not joined it. Maybe that's because they don't want to make enemies of the CDC, I don't know. But I do think that's significant. Nonetheless, it's disappointing to read something that the OP @Stallion clearly wants people to believe is some objective, sober legal analysis of this case, when it's nothing but a hit job by a cruise industry hater. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

Oh, ok. Now that you have passed judgment on OP’s post and determined it to be unworthy we shall all just “move along”. 🙄 

Edited May 12, 2021 by harkinmr

[KennyFla]

40 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Njhorseman above is correct. The state has not been in direct discussions with the CDC about a cruise restart.  The cruise lines are, but only just “realized” that the CSO is not going away and they have no choice.  And again, the cruise lines are not even a party to the lawsuit. That is very telling. 

Here is the current status of each cruise ship with the CDC.  How did this happen if the cruise lines have not been working with the CDC?   Before you get into wordplay, working/negotiating is the same thing.  The cruise lines have been acting in good faith.  The CDC has not.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/crew-disembarkations-commercial-travel.html