Florida wins so Carnival can sail with kids

[embarkation75]

1 hour ago, vacruisin said:

I wonder, will all ports allow Carnival ships to dock if unvaccinated passengers are onboard?  Or if we’ll only be allowed to do book shore excursions sponsored by Carnival?     

That was going to be an issue even before this ruling as many of the destination ports may not permit cruises with even the slightest number of unvaccinated to dock. While Mexico won't likely stop any ships, many of the smaller island nations may forbid mixed vax and anti-vaxxer passenger cruises to dock. This doesn't even include home port rules this could enable. 

[BlerkOne]

20 minutes ago, sailingships said:

Because the CDC thought they could just throw out anything and see if it would stick to the wall. And it worked for more than a year. Very little of their rules were lawful however.

In your opinion.  The CSO is only months old - not over a year.

[embarkation75]

2 hours ago, bdever said:

Exactly, we most likely will need to default to unvaccinated protocols with a greater number of unvaccinated children sailing. It’s obviously been working in other parts of the world for sometime now. Carnival is not going to put themselves at risk financially by allowing a greater number of unvaccinated passengers onboard with greater risk of an outbreak and as you have wisely pointed out, we now have the Delta variant to contend with. Be careful what you wish for.

I honestly have no idea what to expect now given this ruling with protocols aside from little to no consistency from one cruiseline to the next,  not to mention one home/destination port to the next. As long as unvaccinated are required to get both a PCR and rapid test ahead of embarkation, then I as a vaccinated individual have no problem cruising with them. However, the minute my cruise itinerary, onboard entertainment, shore excursions, etc.. is impacted by the anti-vaxxer's on the ship, then Carnival will be sending me a refund.

Edited June 19, 2021 by embarkation75

[hurricane0226]

12 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

In your opinion.  The CSO is only months old - not over a year.

October 30 2020

[BlerkOne]

5 minutes ago, hurricane0226 said:

October 30 2020

As I said,less than a year old 

[SNJCruisers]

6 hours ago, ChutChut said:

Oh sure Carnival will. Moreover, Carnival is gonna get spanked by the FL no-vaccine law.

Similar to how Celebrity is gonna get spanked.  😕

[knight2096]

7 hours ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

No, the judge is telling a non-elected bureaucratic body that they have overstepped their authority - by a lot. He even stated the CDC sounded authoritarian in their responses under questioning during the trial. This is the point of a system with checks and balances, so that one branch of government cannot trample on the constitution or the public.

BRAVO! Well said!

Edited June 19, 2021 by knight2096

[cruisingguy007]

3 hours ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

No, COVID will not magically disappear. But with vaccines, effective therapy drugs, naturally-acquired immunity, and an increasing understanding of the virus, we can get back to normal.

 

Hopefully the cruise industry can survive the long route. If they simply "return to normal" the outcome is pretty predictable. The transportation aspects of this ruling are also troubling. There is a reason masks are still required for public transportation. This may not end up how many imagine. We may all end up in the same boat of restrictions and cruising may be far from normal. More fear, uncertainty and doubt isn't a good position for the cruise lines or those holding cruise stocks.     

[HLGW60]

I’m guessing the CDC will appeal this decision.

[BoozinCroozin]

I have opinions from both camps. First, I was against the CDC targeting a specific industry with impossible rules that no business could operate under. Second, when they started loosening the rules, I was for it just so cruise lines could sail and start making revenue. Now, with the injunction in place in 30 days, the CDC has lost a ton of credibility, but they still wield a mighty sword but they would not be able to use it on a specific industry which is why I think the CDC is done with this mess.

• The could require 100% PCR testing on the day of return, not 24, 48, or 72 hours ahead, but Day Of. If there are any positive test, the ship can be banned from returning to port until a 14-day quarantine is complete and 100% onboard are negative.
• Any wild restriction they put in place would have to extend to all forms of international travel for return to the US. The CDC would not be able to target the cruise industry. If they implement the above, the same would have to go for airlines. I don't see the airlines doing a PCR test in order to land in the US. 
• The CDC will have to provide a precise set of requirements to the Judge in order to be permitted to implement. If the Judge disagrees with any of it, then it is rejected. There can be no ambiguity, rules specific to cruises, and anything that contradicts what the State of FL has implemented for covid protocols.

Pros:

1. I see cruises being permitted to sail with unvaccinated guests and not restricted to the 95% rule. This was an arbitrary number. Any number put in place, has to transfer to airlines and other travel as well. I think the Judge will require that and I know for a fact that the CDC will not go after the airline industry.
2. Unvaccinated will have free reign with no restrictions. Vaccinated passengers may be required to additional protocols (maybe). 
3. Cruise lines can pretty much "return to normal". Although they won't, the ruling pretty much puts this into play. I am sure they are going to remain cautious, but this ruling pretty much does it. 

Cons

1. The CDC could try to appeal it, but I doubt there will be any success without the same rules in place for all other forms of travel.
2. I doubt this will happen, but... Rules could get put into limbo and no sailing occur until the appeals are complete. The CDC could get one of the other Departments to step up to put a halt to it. Extremely doubtful on this one since no other Department has even acknowledged they would do it.

[BoozinCroozin]

10 hours ago, PointNemo said:

And a judge is not an epidemiologist. Very bad form and precedent in my opinion.

No, the Judge is not an epidemiologist as much as an epidemiologist is not a lawyer. If the CDC had any sense of epidemiology, they would know that the transmission of an airborne virus can be passed along on all other forms of travel as well. There would be blanket rules across all travel but the bribes to keep airlines active is the problem. Trains, cargo ships, airlines, cruise ships, all of it, would have one set of rules that all must abide by. It doesn't matter if it will cost the airlines $Ms. They have nickeled and dimed everyone to death.

 

Also, if the CDC were actually epidemiologists, they would not have been playing politics.

[bucfan2]

7 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

Like magic, covid will just disappear eh? The ruling solves everything? It's like a miracle! 

Awesome indeed!  

[chengkp75]

12 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

Here is another link.  Where are all those prognosticators now.   Love it. 
 

While the decision is a huge setback for the CDC, it is not the end of the story.  One thing stated that gives me pause to consider that an appeal is definitely in the works, and that this may well be overturned is the statement:

 

"the CDC could fashion a modification in which it would retain some public health authority."

 

This sounds to me like the judge is waffling on the whole issue of authority, saying that the CSO overreaches their authority, but also acknowledging that the CDC has the authority to set public health policies, while saying that any future requirements would be non-binding.  I haven't read the entire ruling yet, but I think that the "non-binding" part will be the downfall of this ruling, as the authority to grant "free pratique" is a clearly defined federal authority, and is mandated to the USPHS, of which the CDC is a part.  And, I think that the since the cruise lines were moving ahead with starting operations under the CSO, that the Florida case still lacks a showing of future harm.  The state may well have suffered harm over the past 15 months, but why did it take them that long to file the suit, if it were solely about the jobs of citizens.   I notice that DeSantis calls out the Biden administration for censure, while ignoring that the previous administration controlled the CDC for twice as long as this administration during the cruise shutdown.

 

After a quick run through of the ruling, one thing stands out, that the judge acknowledges the federal government's and CDC's authority to inspect and detain any and all ships requesting "free pratique", and to require a "bill of health", he claims that the requirements like putting testing labs on the ships is unfair and unreasonable due to cost, yet the cruise lines have been building ships and buying equipment, training crew and having them follow restrictive sanitation requirements for decades under the VSP, which no other sector of the maritime industry needs to meet, nor any other sector of the transportation industry needs to meet.  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.

 

 

Edited June 19, 2021 by chengkp75

[jimbo5544]

36 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

While the decision is a huge setback for the CDC, it is not the end of the story.  One thing stated that gives me pause to consider that an appeal is definitely in the works, and that this may well be overturned is the statement:

 

"the CDC could fashion a modification in which it would retain some public health authority."

 

This sounds to me like the judge is waffling on the whole issue of authority, saying that the CSO overreaches their authority, but also acknowledging that the CDC has the authority to set public health policies, while saying that any future requirements would be non-binding.  I haven't read the entire ruling yet, but I think that the "non-binding" part will be the downfall of this ruling, as the authority to grant "free pratique" is a clearly defined federal authority, and is mandated to the USPHS, of which the CDC is a part.  And, I think that the since the cruise lines were moving ahead with starting operations under the CSO, that the Florida case still lacks a showing of future harm.  The state may well have suffered harm over the past 15 months, but why did it take them that long to file the suit, if it were solely about the jobs of citizens.   I notice that DeSantis calls out the Biden administration for censure, while ignoring that the previous administration controlled the CDC for twice as long as this administration during the cruise shutdown.

 

After a quick run through of the ruling, one thing stands out, that the judge acknowledges the federal government's and CDC's authority to inspect and detain any and all ships requesting "free pratique", and to require a "bill of health", he claims that the requirements like putting testing labs on the ships is unfair and unreasonable due to cost, yet the cruise lines have been building ships and buying equipment, training crew and having them follow restrictive sanitation requirements for decades under the VSP, which no other sector of the maritime industry needs to meet, nor any other sector of the transportation industry needs to meet.  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.

 

 

Quite an analysis.  There are many unanswered questions and it may well cause hiccups to the return to service.  The state filed the for us the people who live in Florida and we also really know it for the industry and revenue it brings into the state.  You know my thoughts on the CDC, I give big time kudos to a judge to step up to the plate and do what our government should have done.  If the CDC had truly wanted the industry to sail again, we would not be where we are today.  I appreciate your thoughts on the complexity.

[bucfan2]

5 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

Similar to how Celebrity is gonna get spanked.  😕

Or not. 

[Heartgrove]

1 hour ago, BoozinCroozin said:

I

• Any wild restriction they put in place would have to extend to all forms of international travel for return to the US. The CDC would not be able to target the cruise industry. If they implement the above, the same would have to go for airlines. I don't see the airlines doing a PCR test in order to land in the US. 

 

Currently for months now ALL returning passengers entering the USA and arriving on International flights are required to present a negative PCR test not older than three days. The onus is on the passenger with the airlines as the gatekeeper for this CDC rule and will deny boarding at the embarkation airport. If you read the CDC requirement there are no exceptions and even includes diplomats.

 

Strange how the airlines haven't complained about that. I suppose the CDC could move to that tactic seeing as the airlines have been doing it without complaint.

[jimbo5544]

7 hours ago, sailingships said:

Because the CDC thought they could just throw out anything and see if it would stick to the wall. And it worked for more than a year. Very little of their rules were lawful however.

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.  

[thanna]

Everyone is talking about how vax vs. non-vax passengers will be treated on the ship, but don't forget the cruise line can't ask if you are vaccinated in Florida. Still do not know how Carnival is going to operate even 1 vaccinated only cruise in Florida. Now with this ruling the governor has no reason to give the cruise lines any leeway on the law. SO, everybody gets tested and everybody wears a mask.

  

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, thanna said:

Everyone is talking about how vax vs. non-vax passengers will be treated on the ship, but don't forget the cruise line can't ask if you are vaccinated in Florida. Still do not know how Carnival is going to operate even 1 vaccinated only cruise in Florida. Now with this ruling the governor has no reason to give the cruise lines any leeway on the law. SO, everybody gets tested and everybody wears a mask.

  

I would wager they already have a workaround

[jimbo5544]

15 minutes ago, Heartgrove said:

 

Currently for months now ALL returning passengers entering the USA and arriving on International flights are required to present a negative PCR test not older than three days. The onus is on the passenger with the airlines as the gatekeeper for this CDC rule and will deny boarding at the embarkation airport. If you read the CDC requirement there are no exceptions and even includes diplomats.

 

Strange how the airlines haven't complained about that. I suppose the CDC could move to that tactic seeing as the airlines have been doing it without complaint.

Or maybe they will just due what they are supposed to and work with the industry they tossed asside because they thought they COULD.

[BoozinCroozin]

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.

[balcony bound]

5 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I would wager they already have a workaround

I'm on your side of this wager.  Duffy has said all along they are working with Desantis.

[jimbo5544]

2 minutes ago, balcony bound said:

I'm on your side of this wager.  Duffy has said all along they are working with Desantis.

I was not disagreeing with you and understand.  Was really making the point towards the CDC.and their “control”.  I should have worded it better.

Edited June 19, 2021 by jimbo5544

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

I miss a lot when I'm not constantly checking on CC !

 

Not going to read 9 pages of speculation - only going to throw in here that I hope things stay as planned for our 8/7 MG sailing (vaccinated/no masks or distancing on the ship).

 

I don't care which side "prevails", just don't throw a bunch of unvaccinated people on the ship at this point. I want the closest thing to a normal cruise experience as possible.

 

Tom

[chengkp75]

13 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I would wager they already have a workaround

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.