So the states can mandate the rules?

[RedIguana]

1 minute ago, harkinmr said:

You are not understanding.  The legislation, by its own terms, and under federal law, cannot regulate the airline industry in this manner.  There is no need for a lawsuit to challenge the state law and the vaccine ban does not otherwise prevent the airlines, or any industry for that matter, from imposing a vaccine mandate to begin with.  The only thing the legislation does is give the state the ability to apply a fine against the business.

You are almost there....The Law is NOT trying to regulate the airline industry. It does not have any effect on airline operations at all. The law does not PREVENT the airlines from asking for proof of vaccination, it only fines them afterwards:) It is no different than requiring state or county business licenses or paying Florida taxes. They are in the State of Florida. So as written it applies to ANY business except for certain health care exemptions ( original Executive order included just asking if vaccinated, healthcare exemption was most likely carved out for that) doing business in the State of Florida.  Also, it is not OUR government who will require the vaccines, it is a Foreign government that will require them for entry. The airlines I believe would face fines for not verify they meet the Foreign governments requirements for entry. As I said, I do believe they will be ruled exempt, but until it is challenged they are not. Granted, they won't have to challenge it if Florida does not try to impose fines...same as for the Cruise Industry.

[sugcarol]

Fain said in his last video about unvaccinated cruisers paying more. I predict that unvaccinated passengers will be required to have a covid test daily like the hospitals and businesses do right now. At the unvaxed at their own expense. So you can show your vaccine card and get on with your cruise, while the unvaxed will jump through hoops. When money enters the picture the unvaxed will change their minds.

Edited June 8, 2021 by sugcarol

[harkinmr]

15 minutes ago, RedIguana said:

You are almost there....The Law is NOT trying to regulate the airline industry. It does not have any effect on airline operations at all. The law does not PREVENT the airlines from asking for proof of vaccination, it only fines them afterwards:) It is no different than requiring state or county business licenses or paying Florida taxes. They are in the State of Florida. So as written it applies to ANY business except for certain health care exemptions ( original Executive order included just asking if vaccinated, healthcare exemption was most likely carved out for that) doing business in the State of Florida.  Also, it is not OUR government who will require the vaccines, it is a Foreign government that will require them for entry. The airlines I believe would face fines for not verify they meet the Foreign governments requirements for entry. As I said, I do believe they will be ruled exempt, but until it is challenged they are not. Granted, they won't have to challenge it if Florida does not try to impose fines...same as for the Cruise Industry.

Oh, but it does have an effect on airline operations if what you contend is true: that the vaccine ban is applicable to them.  The theory being that the state can fine the airline based on the ban.  As I said, and you repeated, the law does not PREVENT the airlines from asking for proof of vaccination, it just purports to be able to fine them.  The fine would be unlawful against them as their is no authority to impose it to begin with.

 

You raise an interesting and more important point at the end, and it goes more specifically to how much the ban would not apply to the airlines.  IF a foreign country requires a vaccine to enter, the country will not allow the airline to land or disembark passengers unless such vaccine clearance is given.  The airlines, instead of risking this, will/do ask for proof of vaccination before boarding any passenger to travel to that country.  In that instance, it is international law driving the mandate and that is REALLY out of the realm of what the state can control.  

 

The airlines will not face fines.  And my firm belief is that the cruise companies will not either.

[RedIguana]

14 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

 

 

The airlines will not face fines.  And my firm belief is that the cruise companies will not either.

Yes, we have always been in agreement on that I believe. The question is whether the State will attempt to enforce its law. The law gives the state the authority to impose the fine. No law saying you get fined for doing something, no authority under which to impose the fine for doing that. Now becomes the question of whether that law is constitutional or is otherwise superseded by a higher law. If airlines or cruise lines were exempt in the law itself, as are certain health company exemptions, no authority would exist within the law, and a fine could not be imposed. They are not, and as the law is written fit the definition of a business doing business in the state of Florida, and therefor Florida under its law has the legal authority to impose a fine. If they would, now the business could challenge the law under the commerce clause case law, federal law supersedes, etc, and a court would determine the validity of the law. Until a court declares the law is not valid for airlines and cruise ships, I believe they fit the letter of the law as written, although I do believe it will not stand up to a court challenge. I do not think the FAA could overrule it without a court order, but that is an attorney question.

        Another interesting point is that it is now a state statute, not an executive order under emergency powers (the previous authority til the law was passed). So the only control DeSantis has over it is to instruct his attorneys general to ignore it under certain conditions.

[jcc1025]

I find it had to believe than anyone who has not been vaccinated would want to get on a cruise ship. And as someone else said I think their position in court as very weak but it does take someone like a cruise line to actually be fined to start the process and in general states can not pass bills that are less restrictive than federal, they can pass more restrictive laws but usually not less and they don't hold up. Of course those court cases and take a while to wind through the process.

Then if they if do get on without declaring if they have been vaccinated and have not it will most likely be a seven day boat ride because the ports they visit will require them to show proof and not let them on shore if they don't and those places don't care who your governor is. Seems to be a little bit of grandstand play by the governors, makes for great press back home, but then welcome to the current world of politics today. 

[ChutChut]

On 6/6/2021 at 6:34 AM, Demongear said:

With Florida being at the forefront of proof of vaccinations not being required and the State of Washington requiring vaccinations does the state set the rules for RCCL to sail from each state? What comes to mind what does New Jersey and Maryland do now? The seemed to have more Covid restrictions in place than Florida did. I can see NJ wanting proof of vaccines and maybe as well as Maryland.

In terms of how businesses conduct business in its state - yes. And with respect to invasion of medical privacy - yes. States control whether its school kids must have certain vaccines before entering school - feds don't have that power, etc.

[ChutChut]

16 minutes ago, RedIguana said:

Yes, we have always been in agreement on that I believe. The question is whether the State will attempt to enforce its law. The law gives the state the authority to impose the fine. No law saying you get fined for doing something, no authority under which to impose the fine for doing that. Now becomes the question of whether that law is constitutional or is otherwise superseded by a higher law. If airlines or cruise lines were exempt in the law itself, as are certain health company exemptions, no authority would exist within the law, and a fine could not be imposed. They are not, and as the law is written fit the definition of a business doing business in the state of Florida, and therefor Florida under its law has the legal authority to impose a fine. If they would, now the business could challenge the law under the commerce clause case law, federal law supersedes, etc, and a court would determine the validity of the law. Until a court declares the law is not valid for airlines and cruise ships, I believe they fit the letter of the law as written, although I do believe it will not stand up to a court challenge. I do not think the FAA could overrule it without a court order, but that is an attorney question.

        Another interesting point is that it is now a state statute, not an executive order under emergency powers (the previous authority til the law was passed). So the only control DeSantis has over it is to instruct his attorneys general to ignore it under certain conditions.

The Commerce Clause is NOT a cause of action a litigant can cite. It is the power of the US CONGRESS to regulate a certain activity involving interstate activity and those with foreign nations. Usually, the Commerce Clause is referenced due to Congress taking an action (enacting laws) certain entities/individuals don't believe it has the power to enact. 

[BecciBoo]

Hopefully, if RCCL has some document that lets you voluntarily enter your Covid card info, I intend to give it.  If it were voluntary, would that be sufficient to prove you are vaxd thereby giving you a way to remain onboard and unquarantined if an outbreak occurred?  I think a vast majority are going to be vaxd and if they don't demand proof that would satisfy the Governor's order.

[RedIguana]

4 minutes ago, ChutChut said:

The Commerce Clause is NOT a cause of action a litigant can cite. It is the power of the US CONGRESS to regulate a certain activity involving interstate activity and those with foreign nations. Usually, the Commerce Clause is referenced due to Congress taking an action (enacting laws) certain entities/individuals don't believe it has the power to enact.

Flying (international/out of state) and cruising involve interstate activity and foreign travel. I believe in this case the commerce clause may be used in the case of a foreign port/country requiring vaccinations that the US government/foreign government has the authority to regulate the travel requirements, not the state of Florida. "The commerce clause has traditionally been interpreted both as a grant of positive authority to Congress and as an implied prohibition of state laws and regulations that interfere with or discriminate against interstate commerce (the so-called “dormant” commerce clause). " Last statement pulled from Britannica as a reference.

[rtazz17]

8 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

There are some states that have partial bans and other restrictions so if you include those, then that number could reach 23. 

As well they should. Be careful what rights you want to give up. More government is never ever the answer. Should we ask for polio or hep b vax card too? Its still around. This is bigger then anyones vacation. This wouldnt end with cruise ships. Or where else it might expand to. Or what it might expand to. If you enjoy your freedoms you should not support show your vax passport laws. Common sense

[sept10dsm]

1 minute ago, rtazz17 said:

As well they should. Be careful what rights you want to give up. More government is never ever the answer. Should we ask for polio or hep b vax card too? Its still around. This is bigger then anyones vacation. This wouldnt end with cruise ships. Or where else it might expand to. Or what it might expand to. If you enjoy your freedoms you should not support show your vax passport laws. Common sense

 

[sept10dsm]

1 minute ago, rtazz17 said:

As well they should. Be careful what rights you want to give up. More government is never ever the answer. Should we ask for polio or hep b vax card too? Its still around. This is bigger then anyones vacation. This wouldnt end with cruise ships. Or where else it might expand to. Or what it might expand to. If you enjoy your freedoms you should not support show your vax passport laws. Common sense

Yes, people are way to quick to give up their rights.  I agree 1000 percent

[floridalady]

5 hours ago, coffeebean said:

For the 100000000000th time........vaccinated people are not afraid for their health and safety, generally. I will speak for myself here and say that my mRNA vaccine offers me protection from Covid and I feel perfectly safe. I have no fear of Covid. I have been out and about among the un-vaxxed and without a mask too.

 

What I do not want to deal with is a cruise vacation that will be negatively impacted if there were a Covid outbreak on board because of un-vaxxed passengers. I also do not want to adhere to safety protocols that will be dictated by un-vaxxed passengers on board.

 

How many times do we vaccinated folks have to say that in response to that silly comment that you made? Maybe another thousand times will do it? Will it take that many times for you to understand the stance of vaccinated people? SMH!

some people just don't wanna get it.

[not-enough-cruising]

3 hours ago, harkinmr said:

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.  Cruise lines have a right to operate with a vaccine mandate.  There is no "right to cruise".  No one has to get the vaccine, but sometimes choices have consequences.  Oh well.

Seems like Celebrity came up with a good way to handle it.  Hitting anyone showing up without vaccination proof in the wallet. 
 

[harkinmr]

2 hours ago, RedIguana said:

Yes, we have always been in agreement on that I believe. The question is whether the State will attempt to enforce its law. The law gives the state the authority to impose the fine. No law saying you get fined for doing something, no authority under which to impose the fine for doing that. Now becomes the question of whether that law is constitutional or is otherwise superseded by a higher law. If airlines or cruise lines were exempt in the law itself, as are certain health company exemptions, no authority would exist within the law, and a fine could not be imposed. They are not, and as the law is written fit the definition of a business doing business in the state of Florida, and therefor Florida under its law has the legal authority to impose a fine. If they would, now the business could challenge the law under the commerce clause case law, federal law supersedes, etc, and a court would determine the validity of the law. Until a court declares the law is not valid for airlines and cruise ships, I believe they fit the letter of the law as written, although I do believe it will not stand up to a court challenge. I do not think the FAA could overrule it without a court order, but that is an attorney question.

        Another interesting point is that it is now a state statute, not an executive order under emergency powers (the previous authority til the law was passed). So the only control DeSantis has over it is to instruct his attorneys general to ignore it under certain conditions.

You and I are going to have to disagree on this.  A law, passed by a state legislature, is never simply valid on its face.  I absolutely disagree that any law passed by any state legislature applies automatically pending approval by a court of law. That is why state legislation routinely includes a provision expressly exempting any prohibitions under federal law.  You are assuming power in the state that does not exist. State power is specifically limited by the US Constitution. The airlines will rightfully ignore this law. Let the state attempt to fine them and see them laughed out of court. Apparently you believe that the Governor’s power is limitless. It is what he would like you to believe.  It is not. 

[harkinmr]

2 hours ago, jcc1025 said:

I find it had to believe than anyone who has not been vaccinated would want to get on a cruise ship. And as someone else said I think their position in court as very weak but it does take someone like a cruise line to actually be fined to start the process and in general states can not pass bills that are less restrictive than federal, they can pass more restrictive laws but usually not less and they don't hold up. Of course those court cases and take a while to wind through the process.

Then if they if do get on without declaring if they have been vaccinated and have not it will most likely be a seven day boat ride because the ports they visit will require them to show proof and not let them on shore if they don't and those places don't care who your governor is. Seems to be a little bit of grandstand play by the governors, makes for great press back home, but then welcome to the current world of politics today. 

You have it reversed. Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts state law. States can pass LESS restrictive laws, not MORE restrictive than federal law. 

Edited June 9, 2021 by harkinmr

[ChuckRambo]

9 hours ago, Joseph2017China said:

My advice.....Please if you are afraid......and are still hiding......even with a vaccine......stay away, stay home......the rest of us will go on the cruise and you can wait another 2-3 years in hiding

 

^^^This…on steroids^^^

[harkinmr]

9 minutes ago, Coupe said:

You do not know whaT you are talking about. Many who are posting do not. Courts do not have to rubber stamp laws for them to be in effect.  A business does not have a right to your health records before doing business. People who have had the virus do not need the vaccine and have no reason to get it (science). Many people simply do not need the vaccine. Demanding that someone get the vaccine so that you feel comfortable is wrong. The Federal government is limited by the constitution. The Constitution is an agreement between the states. It exists to limit Federal power. Not to limit state power. 

 

Wearing a mask does not protect someone from a virus. Masks spread disease. Masks are purely political. 

This is all so very wrong I am not going to even respond . You could at least bother to do some research.  🙄

Edited June 9, 2021 by harkinmr

[jstraw20]

14 minutes ago, Coupe said:

You do not know whaT you are talking about.

 

 

14 minutes ago, Coupe said:

 Masks spread disease. Masks are purely political. 

 

Pot meet kettle.

[jstraw20]

12 minutes ago, ChuckRambo said:

^^^This…on steroids^^^

 

Yep, some don't get it and some don't want to get it. It has nothing to do with fear. 

[ChuckRambo]

 

1 hour ago, rtazz17 said:

As well they should. Be careful what rights you want to give up. More government is never ever the answer. Should we ask for polio or hep b vax card too? Its still around. This is bigger then anyones vacation. This wouldnt end with cruise ships. Or where else it might expand to. Or what it might expand to. If you enjoy your freedoms you should not support show your vax passport laws. Common sense

Absolutely correct. If you were to mandate “vaccine passports” at the federal level you would see the inevitable result: A new federal government agency created to enforce and regulate them. And, as anyone paying attention should already know, once a federal bureaucracy is created it has to be funded and it never, ever goes away. 

[Coupe]

33 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

You have it reversed. Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts state law. States can pass LESS restrictive laws, not MORE restrictive than federal law. 

The CDC does not make laws. The States through elections regulate Federal law. I know what I'm talking about.

[ChuckRambo]

4 hours ago, harkinmr said:

Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.  Cruise lines have a right to operate with a vaccine mandate.  There is no "right to cruise".  No one has to get the vaccine, but sometimes choices have consequences.  Oh well.

Curiously, there IS a right to vote and there are a lot of people who insist that it is illegal and unconstitutional to demand an identification card to do so. 

 

Please also see “public accommodation” laws. 

[harkinmr]

24 minutes ago, Coupe said:

The CDC does not make laws. The States through elections regulate Federal law. I know what I'm talking about.

Oh you know what you are talking about do you?  Good grief!  You are right about one thing. The CDC does not “make law”. They are, however, empowered by federal law to regulate in accord with their mandate. THAT is how they get their power.  And the CDC is not mandating vaccines. They have left mandating vaccines to the discretion of the cruise lines. States impact federal law through elections. They DO NOT “regulate federal law”. As I said, do some research. Have a great evening!

Edited June 9, 2021 by harkinmr

[MrMarc]

37 minutes ago, Coupe said:

The CDC does not make laws. The States through elections regulate Federal law. I know what I'm talking about.

So are you saying that all regulations promulgated by Federal agencies do not have the force of Federal law and only specific laws passed by the Legislature are "laws"?  You really might want to rethink your opinion...