Official: Mediation in lawsuit against federal gov., CDC over cruising shutdown has failed

[grandgeezer]

Celebrity has an agreement with the CDC that allows them to sail with paying customers, not the farce of a trial cruise without revenue coming in. It’s a go if the so called governor changes his stance on the vaccination passport or whatever you want to call it. If he doesn’t and it fall through, it’ll be interesting to see how the blame is shifted to the CDC.

[boatseller]

4 minutes ago, jrapps said:

Interesting..is your perspective that FL has all the cards and was expecting the CDC to fold, or the other way around? I think neither are true. I don't think the CDC is being petulant at all (or no more petualt than FL is being), and are not doing this just because they "say so". If that were the case, we wouldn't have seen any movement on the CSO. Are they perfect? Of course not, it's a hot mess. But people are trying to play victim and looking for an "enemy" to fight.

 

I also think the state truly believes they are doing the right thing (even if some of us disagree that they actually are). Desantis wants to start cruising, but he only wants it to restart his way. The word compromise is not in his vocabulary. Cruising may very well start up again under the current CSO rules and nothing he did will have made an impact at all

 

People in this thread are generally going to fall into one of 3 camps. 1)you think this is all the CDCs fault and that FL is trying to save cruising. 2)You think FL is at fault, making this messier than it was especially with the vaccine thing and the CDC is just trying to get cruising started again safely or 3) both share some measure of responsibility.

 

The only vindication here will be in a ruling. And even then, I don't expect anything more than people claiming the judge kicked the can down the road.

 

Yes.  Florida holds all the cards.

 

There is nothing justifying any part of the NSO, Conveyence Mask Order or anything else promulgated by the CDC.  Well, to be absolutely clear, I mean nothing at all, no exceptions.

 

Not only is there no justification, the CDC has been flat out wrong on too many things to be taken seriously on how to wash your hands.

 

And the more we learn every day about the corruption and compromised nature of the NIH casts significant doubt on the motivations of these agencies.  They are not altruistic civil servants looking out for the greater good, they're real-world failures looking for a pay out.

 

All that and, if you just read the ever shifting guidelines, they're just stupid.  I mean no other way to describe them, stupid rules written by stupid people.  I've highlighted some of the more comical parts in other threads.

[coldflame]

36 minutes ago, NightOne said:

 

CDC has too much power. That is what we need to be addressing.

 

Even *if* the injunction is approved, it will be very specific and narrow for the NSO/CSO. If you're really concerned about over reach, you need Congressional action.

[TrulyBlonde]

1 hour ago, boatseller said:

Given the entire NIH/CDC narrative is collapsing, wonder if they'll even show for the next hearing.

Gain of Function Research, masks, emails.....no credibility left. They are in trouble.

[coldflame]

Just now, boatseller said:

Yes.  Florida holds all the cards.

 

 

Excuse me, what? Florida doesn't hold any cards right now -- it's all hot steam. Thanks to Congress, the CDC holds all the cards.

[boatseller]

Just now, coldflame said:

If you're really concerned about over reach, you need Congressional action.

A reason they're going all in with nothing to lose is because some of them know [Vice] President DeDantis will be cleaning house harder than at the Whuan lab.

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, boatseller said:

Yes.  Florida holds all the cards.

That is a very interesting perspective...one I do not share but it isn't up to you or me.

 

I am curious, if you think FL has all the cards and that "nothing" justified the CSO, then you must believe  without any doubt whatsoever that the judge will approve the injunction. If that is true, what will your reaction be if the injunction is denied?

[coldflame]

2 minutes ago, jrapps said:

That is a very interesting perspective...one I do not share but it isn't up to you or me.

 

I am curious, if you think FL has all the cards and that "nothing" justified the CSO, then you must believe  without any doubt whatsoever that the judge will approve the injunction. If that is true, what will your reaction be if the injunction is denied?

 

Congress, specially with the recent Alaska cruise act gives the directive and authority to CDC for CSO/NSO. The judge would have to rule against congressional directive, which would be very unusual.

Edited June 3, 2021 by coldflame

[jrapps]

Just now, coldflame said:

 

Congress, specially with the recent Alaska cruise act gives the directive and authority to CDC for CSO/NSO. The judge would have to rule against congressional directive, which would be very unusual.

Oh I agree...but some people are so dead set in their opinions that anything contrary to that, they have to find some justification to fit reality into the narrative they tell themselves in their head.

 

If the injunction is approved, I may not agree but I can accept it. My theory here is that others on this forum are so much in the "CDC is evil, Desantis is our savior and future president" mindset that if anything were to happen contrary to that, it would be corruption, or some other excuse.

[Pratique]

I don't think that Florida holds many good cards. The landlords have a stronger case against the CDC and they are running into roadblocks.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-06-02/us-appeals-court-leaves-cdc-residential-eviction-ban-in-place

[mmcgann11]

Desantis _ I literally laughed when someone said he'd be president or vice president, as it appears he might be snagged up in the Matt Gaetz fiasco, which seems to be tied to a broader GOP corruption scandal brewing — misplayed this from the start. The litigation should have been a negotiation tactic, not a "our way or the highway" play. His vaccination passport ban is idiocy -- the vast majority of cruisers want it, as do the cruise lines. He could be screwing up sailing from Florida for the time being and also make cruise companies diversify their cruise ports more, so as not to end up so dependent on one state.

 

And no -- none of my three cruises scheduled leave from Florida (Bayonne, Bayonne, Baltimore) — so I don't have a dog in the fight. Probably won't cruise out of Fla. again until Biden opens up Cuba again in 2022-23. I'm running low on Cohibas.😉

[boatseller]

1 minute ago, jrapps said:

That is a very interesting perspective...one I do not share but it isn't up to you or me.

 

I am curious, if you think FL has all the cards and that "nothing" justified the CSO, then you must believe  without any doubt whatsoever that the judge will approve the injunction. If that is true, what will your reaction be if the injunction is denied?

I have no idea what the judge will do but he should grant the injunction.  But I also know Judges can be wrong.

 

I am stating that by any reasonable standard and well published information, the CDC has out lasted the intent of the law: "prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions"

 

Covid is already endemic and wide spread in the United States.  The current NSO does not satisfy this mandate because it has no material affect on the prevalance of covid and never would have.  No amount of bureaucratic rulemaking will change that.

 

The objectives in the NSO itself were acheived months ago, especially in Florida, with little help of guidence form the CDC.  It's all become pointless.

 

I'll now be waiting for someone to lecture me that what's written in the law isn't really what's in the law.

[boatseller]

53 minutes ago, coldflame said:

What are you talking about. There is no date for next hearing. The Congressional Act for Alaska actually gives them the higher odds in this case. 

Mediation failed so it's back to court.  That's just how it works.

[jrapps]

2 minutes ago, boatseller said:

I am stating that by any reasonable standard and well published information, the CDC has out lasted the intent of the law: "prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions"

Do you have a link to this law? My understanding is that the CDC's mission is "to protect America from health, safety and security threats, both foreign and in the U.S. Whether diseases start at home or abroad, are chronic or acute, curable or preventable, human error or deliberate attack, CDC fights disease and supports communities and citizens to do the same."

 

If the CDCs sole mission was to prevent diseases from entering, then I can see where your argument is coming from. But that is not the purpose of the CDC. The fact that Covid is already endemic and wide spread in the United States does nothing as far as I know to limit the CDCs scope.

[boatseller]

50 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Why should they change anything with regard to cruising?  The cruise lines are cooperating and things are progressing as if the Florida lawsuit didn't even exist.  When all you have is "cancel the CDC and the CSO", you have nowhere to go but down.  An incessant need to be right and to win has many times proven to do people in.  Looks like another victim will be claimed.

Well, I'm still waiting for you to do me in.  Come, on, I'm sure you can find plenty of totally 100% correct and accurate Fauci quotes to put me in my place....right?

 

I mean, we're all stil waiting for that one thing the CDC got right.  You haven't found anything?

[coldflame]

2 minutes ago, boatseller said:

Mediation failed so it's back to court.  That's just how it works.

My main point is there's no hearing scheduled. And beyond that you claim FL has all the cards. It has none. Thank Congress for giving it the directive and authority over cruise protocols with the recently passed law for Alaska (but authority and directive supersede the specific). All FL has is a loud, chest-pounding governor.

[jrapps]

7 minutes ago, boatseller said:

I have no idea what the judge will do but he should grant the injunction.  But I also know Judges can be wrong.

And this is the logic that causes problems. If the judge rules the way I want, then its a fair ruling. If the judge rules the other way, then the judge is wrong.

 

There's no room in this for the possibility that the judge will rule according to the law, and that you YOUR interpretation of it can be wrong?

[smokeybandit]

2 minutes ago, coldflame said:

My main point is there's no hearing scheduled. And beyond that you claim FL has all the cards. It has none. Thank Congress for giving it the directive and authority over cruise protocols with the recently passed law for Alaska (but authority and directive supersede the specific). All FL has is a loud, chest-pounding governor.

Without that lawsuit, cruise lines would still be awaiting the technical guidance to start test cruises

[jrapps]

4 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Without that lawsuit, cruise lines would still be awaiting the technical guidance to start test cruises

This is an assumption (and one I don't deny) but the CDC never said. "well we decided to publish technical guidance because we got sued". If it's true (and I don't deny it), then the lawsuit served it's purpose. It can go now having no more purpose to fulfill (unless the injunction is approved, then that proves I know nothing! LOL)

 

I still maintain FL has no cards to play here. If they did, they would have been played.

[boatseller]

26 minutes ago, jrapps said:

Do you have a link to this law? My understanding is that the CDC's mission is "to protect America from health, safety and security threats, both foreign and in the U.S. Whether diseases start at home or abroad, are chronic or acute, curable or preventable, human error or deliberate attack, CDC fights disease and supports communities and citizens to do the same."

 

If the CDCs sole mission was to prevent diseases from entering, then I can see where your argument is coming from. But that is not the purpose of the CDC. The fact that Covid is already endemic and wide spread in the United States does nothing as far as I know to limit the CDCs scope.

That is a Mission Statement and carries the same force in law as the Creed of the US Postal Service, exactly nothing.

 

I'm quoting from Section 361 of the Public Health Services Act.  The actual law that authorizes the NSO.

 

Ah-ha!  A breakthrough.  Recognizing the other argument is the first step.  I'm sure the Florida legal team can articulate it better than me...maybe :).

 

BTW, the CDC has not won anything on the Eviction Moritorium, the Judge set aside her ruling pending appeal, a very common practice.  The CDC is still down one here.

[TrulyBlonde]

14 minutes ago, jrapps said:

This is an assumption (and one I don't deny) but the CDC never said. "well we decided to publish technical guidance because we got sued". If it's true (and I don't deny it), then the lawsuit served it's purpose. It can go now having no more purpose to fulfill (unless the injunction is approved, then that proves I know nothing! LOL)

 

I still maintain FL has no cards to play here. If they did, they would have been played.

Yes, but....the latest news does not bode well for NIH nor CDC. I think DeSantis knows this and is holding the cards. Public perception of Fauci, NIH, and CDC is in the toilet. Don't you think it is coincidental that CDC removed the mask mandate in the last few weeks? They all knew these emails were coming out and part of their damage control. Just my opinion.

[MacMarauder]

It seems like the only winners here are the lawyers. It's sad there is so much drama to get cruising started again but with the positive things going in our direction (vaccinations up, cases down, cruising starting in Europe) I still have faith that the light is at the end of the tunnel! 

[boatseller]

26 minutes ago, jrapps said:

And this is the logic that causes problems. If the judge rules the way I want, then its a fair ruling. If the judge rules the other way, then the judge is wrong.

 

There's no room in this for the possibility that the judge will rule according to the law, and that you YOUR interpretation of it can be wrong?

If the CDC were acting under clear legal authority, there would be little to challange.  However, this is a case of Congress ducking it's rule making authority, instead relying on an unaccountable bureaucracy.

 

HHS/CDC are, conveniently for them, in charge of interpreting the law and creating rules and enforcing the rules.  So, even if this Judge rules on 'the law' the loser will move the fight to the next level.

 

And to answer your specific question, if the judge rules in a way I don't like, they're wrong.  Only a fool would deny that.

[jrapps]

2 minutes ago, boatseller said:

That is a Mission Statement and carries the same force in law as the Creed of the US Postal Service, exactly nothing.

 

I'm quoting from Section 361 of the Public Health Services Act.  The actual law that authorizes the NSO.

 

Ah-ha!  A breakthrough.  Recognizing the other argument is the first step.  I'm sure the Florida legal team can articulate it better than me...maybe :).

 

BTW, the CDC has not won anything on the Eviction Moritorium, the Judge set aside her ruling pending appeal, a very common practice.  The CDC is still down one here.

A-ha! You missed a important part of this, and this is what happens when you mention a statute, but don't link to it or quote it!

 

The Federal government derives its authority for isolation and quarantine from the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states.

 

https://www.hhs.gov/answers/public-health-and-safety/who-has-the-authority-to-enforce-isolation-and-quarantine/index.html#:~:text=Under section 361 of the,United States and between states.

 

Just because a disease is already pervasive in the US does not limit the HHS or CDC to regulate and control it's spread.

 

A breakthrough.  Recognizing the other argument is the first step.

[harkinmr]

18 minutes ago, jrapps said:

This is an assumption (and one I don't deny) but the CDC never said. "well we decided to publish technical guidance because we got sued". If it's true (and I don't deny it), then the lawsuit served it's purpose. It can go now having no more purpose to fulfill (unless the injunction is approved, then that proves I know nothing! LOL)

 

I still maintain FL has no cards to play here. If they did, they would have been played.

Well, given that the CDC came out with its technical guidance on April 2nd and the lawsuit was filed on April 8th, I don't think one can say the suit prompted the CDC.  Although I'm sure it will make many feel better thinking that.