Florida wins so Carnival can sail with kids

[balcony bound]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

 

So, do you believe that this ability of the CDC to only issue "suggestions" will be limited to covid, or do you believe the judge removed the federal government's authority to impose public health requirements on all vessels and airplanes engaged in international transportation, as well as airplanes, buses, and trains involved in interstate transportation?

 

He seems to have limited the ability to protect the public health by limiting the scope of the "other measures" clause of the PHA to only refer to the previous 6 situations.  It seems unlikely that the framers of the act would include a generic "other measures" clause if they only meant it to refer to a set of specific circumstances already spelled out.

This matter was pertaining to the CSO.

[MrMarc]

Just now, balcony bound said:

 

Didn't look for it, but there is no way they will go by a September 2020 guideline.  Like I said, things have changed.

I agree things have changed, but this report took months to be created, so even if they start now, when would you expect new recommendations?  And if cruise lines go against the rules that they had created, what happens to their possible liability?  I am just pointing out that a lot of the new possibilities are worse than what was going on.  While we had some direction prior to this ruling, for now there is absolutely none, and what the Court has asked for in many ways seems contradictory to it's findings in the order.  He want's it settled at mediation, but he has given the CDC very little bargaining power to get Florida to do what he seems to me to want, which is allow for vaccination documentation.  But I think the bottom line is no one has any idea what is going to happen now.

[balcony bound]

3 minutes ago, MrMarc said:

I agree things have changed, but this report took months to be created

 Some things become outdated.  Worked for many years and experienced the same thing - by the time you are finished with a project, it is obsolete. 

 

We all need to get back to managing ourselves without assistance.

Edited June 19, 2021 by balcony bound

[SRQbeachgirl]

2 minutes ago, MrMarc said:

He want's it settled at mediation, but he has given the CDC very little bargaining power to get Florida to do what he seems to me to want, which is allow for vaccination documentation.  

 

How do you come to that conclusion? The ruling is clear that the judge believes any guidelines or restrictions for the cruise lines should be similar to what is required for other modes of travel. He states this numerous times. Since no other mode of travel requires proof of vaccinations, where in the order does it imply that this should be a requirement for cruises?

[TNcruising02]

The CDC has the opportunity to come up with reasonable rules using current data available to back up their claims and not single out one industry with outdated rules based on old stats and fear.

 

June 2021 is not March 2020.  The ball is in the CDC's court to get with the program.  They didn't require the airlines to do covid tests and test flights before letting people fly, yet it was common sense that traveling with covid was never safe.  They only pushed around the cruise industry.

Anyway, hopefully the CDC will be reasonable and acknowledge that with testing, vaccines, and quarantining positive cases, cruising will be fine as long as the lines have protocols in place to deal with those issues.

Edited June 19, 2021 by TNcruising02

[jimbo5544]

22 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

So, do you believe that this ability of the CDC to only issue "suggestions" will be limited to covid, or do you believe the judge removed the federal government's authority to impose public health requirements on all vessels and airplanes engaged in international transportation, as well as airplanes, buses, and trains involved in interstate transportation?

 

He seems to have limited the ability to protect the public health by limiting the scope of the "other measures" clause of the PHA to only refer to the previous 6 situations.  It seems unlikely that the framers of the act would include a generic "other measures" clause if they only meant it to refer to a set of specific circumstances already spelled out.

I do not think in the macro ways you do.  What II really think is the cdc overstepped big time.  The cruise industry should work with the cdc on the best implementation for now, continued as the virus wanes.  If flareups occur, then work cohesively to solve.   It is clear (to me) the draconian days of do as I say are over.  You might disagree,  but from my viewpoint that is a good thing (the end of the draconian ways, not you and I disagreeing).  

Edited June 19, 2021 by jimbo5544

[MrMarc]

I just realized something, did the Judge flip the burden of proof from Florida proving that the rules were not warranted to making the CDC prove they are?  Florida is the Plaintiff and so theoretically has the burden of proof. Interesting.

[SRQbeachgirl]

5 minutes ago, MrMarc said:

I just realized something, did the Judge flip the burden of proof from Florida proving that the rules were not warranted to making the CDC prove they are?  Florida is the Plaintiff and so theoretically has the burden of proof. Interesting.

 

I read it as Florida proved that the rules were arbitrary and capricious and the CDC provided nothing to counter Florida's arguments except 1.5-year old data. The judge is giving the CDC an opportunity to rectify that, but considering he already asked for it twice I have serious doubts the CDC will be able to provide it. 

Edited June 19, 2021 by SRQbeachgirl

[Radiioman46]

1 hour ago, rabidstoat said:

 

We aren't in a health crisis currently in the US so I wish the government would just stay out of it.

If we're not in a state of health emergency, it makes no sense to require vaccine passports. 

[MrMarc]

38 minutes ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

How do you come to that conclusion? The ruling is clear that the judge believes any guidelines or restrictions for the cruise lines should be similar to what is required for other modes of travel. He states this numerous times. Since no other mode of travel requires proof of vaccinations, where in the order does it imply that this should be a requirement for cruises?

Reading between the lines.  The Judge talks about how important vaccinations are a number of times, and then sends the parties back to mediation.  From what I know, which is only from reports and some Court records, the only real bargaining chip Florida has is giving that up.  And then there is the intangible gut feeling.  

[dandeck]

Wife & I are regular cruisers.  Over 500 nights between us.  We have 8 scheduled between November and February.  There is absolutely no way we will board any ship that doesn't require passengers & crew to be vaccinated.  Anyone who has ANY cruise experience knows for certain how risky it would be.  It would be industry suicide for any line to not require.  The industry is on the brink.  An outbreak, refusals for docking, haven forbid a resulting death... would be the death nail.  There is simply no way the industry can accept the risk of unvaccinated people aboard.  Regulars, like ourselves, are wary.  Watching closely.  Instances like the 2 positive cases aboard Celebrity recently, which required vaccines, are encouraging.  It was contained to only those two.  Proof of the vaccines ability to prevent spread.  Two positives on an unvaccinated ship would have been a disaster!  If you aren't vaccinated, for everyone's sake, stay off cruise ships.  At least for now.

[MrMarc]

30 minutes ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

I read it as Florida proved that the rules were arbitrary and capricious and the CDC provided nothing to counter Florida's arguments except 1.5-year old data. The judge is giving the CDC an opportunity to rectify that, but considering he already asked for it twice I have serious doubts the CDC will be able to provide it. 

But I don't think Florida had "science" to disprove the rules, they just showed that they were onerous and different from other industries.  But I have not read the hearing transcript, so I could be wrong.  I am confused as to why the CDC has not presented more science.  They have it.  You can find it on their website and I have heard it talked about at the Vaccine Advisory Committee meetings. Between that and the Judges "sort of" ruling, I am even more confused than I was before.  And I was pretty confused before.

[cscurlock]

31 minutes ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

I read it as Florida proved that the rules were arbitrary and capricious and the CDC provided nothing to counter Florida's arguments except 1.5-year old data. The judge is giving the CDC an opportunity to rectify that, but considering he already asked for it twice I have serious doubts the CDC will be able to provide it. 

Since the judge says the rules will be non binding.  What are you going to mediate on?  The only reason he wants mediation is a settlement so it doesn't go to appeals.  But the CDC is just going straight to the appeals court on July 18th.  They will go to mediation but will not negotiate on anything.  Why would they do that when its all non binding anyways?  Appeals is the only way forward.  Its silly that the judge is even trying to get a settlement when he said what they were doing was unconstitutional.  If he believes that, he could have killed the CSO now and the CDC would have appealed right away.  I suspect they will need to pass a new ATRA bill and in that bill they can lay out the authority the judge is looking for since the last bill was destroyed by this ruling.

[MrMarc]

6 minutes ago, Radiioman46 said:

If we're not in a state of health emergency, it makes no sense to require vaccine passports. 

Come on, you might not like reality, but at least face it.  The world is in a health emergency.  It will not be over until the variants stop and immunity is at a much higher rate , including for the variants.  Yes, things are better, but it really would not take much to push us the other way if we ignore the situation.

[cscurlock]

5 minutes ago, dandeck said:

Wife & I are regular cruisers.  Over 500 nights between us.  We have 8 scheduled between November and February.  There is absolutely no way we will board any ship that doesn't require passengers & crew to be vaccinated.  Anyone who has ANY cruise experience knows for certain how risky it would be.  It would be industry suicide for any line to not require.  The industry is on the brink.  An outbreak, refusals for docking, haven forbid a resulting death... would be the death nail.  There is simply no way the industry can accept the risk of unvaccinated people aboard.  Regulars, like ourselves, are wary.  Watching closely.  Instances like the 2 positive cases aboard Celebrity recently, which required vaccines, are encouraging.  It was contained to only those two.  Proof of the vaccines ability to prevent spread.  Two positives on an unvaccinated ship would have been a disaster!  If you aren't vaccinated, for everyone's sake, stay off cruise ships.  At least for now.

Its going to be a long haul on this one.  We won't know the actual results of all this probably till after or near November.  The appeals court will probably hold up the CSO while it decides the case from July 18th on and even then it will most likely go to the supreme court.  

[balcony bound]

10 minutes ago, dandeck said:

Wife & I are regular cruisers.  Over 500 nights between us.  We have 8 scheduled between November and February.  There is absolutely no way we will board any ship that doesn't require passengers & crew to be vaccinated.  Anyone who has ANY cruise experience knows for certain how risky it would be.  It would be industry suicide for any line to not require.  The industry is on the brink.  An outbreak, refusals for docking, haven forbid a resulting death... would be the death nail.  There is simply no way the industry can accept the risk of unvaccinated people aboard.  Regulars, like ourselves, are wary.  Watching closely.  Instances like the 2 positive cases aboard Celebrity recently, which required vaccines, are encouraging.  It was contained to only those two.  Proof of the vaccines ability to prevent spread.  Two positives on an unvaccinated ship would have been a disaster!  If you aren't vaccinated, for everyone's sake, stay off cruise ships.  At least for now.

 

COVID will be around for years.  At the moment, the guidelines are two positives (or any number) will result in the passenger being quarantined until the next port, where they will be debarked. I don't think that guideline will change (but it could).  As you mentioned, positives were found even on a fully vaccinated ship.  It's going to happen.  Just like the flu, noro, common colds, etc. people get sick.  I got flu after my flu shot, I've already had COVID and the vaccine - doesn't mean I won't get it again.

 

There won't be any "rufusals for docking."  It has been reported that agreements have been put into place over the last year with all ports.

 

 

[MrMarc]

16 minutes ago, cscurlock said:

Since the judge says the rules will be non binding.  What are you going to mediate on?  The only reason he wants mediation is a settlement so it doesn't go to appeals.  But the CDC is just going straight to the appeals court on July 18th.  They will go to mediation but will not negotiate on anything.  Why would they do that when its all non binding anyways?  Appeals is the only way forward.  Its silly that the judge is even trying to get a settlement when he said what they were doing was unconstitutional.  If he believes that, he could have killed the CSO now and the CDC would have appealed right away.  I suspect they will need to pass a new ATRA bill and in that bill they can lay out the authority the judge is looking for since the last bill was destroyed by this ruling.

I agree, how can something be made Constitutional by agreement of 1 State.  If he had not spent so much time justifying that position,  I might have it was a pressure tactic for settlement.  But he wrote a Law Review article backing up his conclusion.  If upheld, I think it might bring a lot of regulatory rules into question.  

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, balcony bound said:

 

Didn't look for it, but there is no way they will go by a September 2020 guideline.  Like I said, things have changed.

but but but... The judge referenced it. Cruise lines have to prepare for the least common denominator. Ports, too. Get ready for bondage.

[BlerkOne]

7 minutes ago, balcony bound said:

 

 

 

There won't be any "rufusals for docking."  It has been reported that agreements have been put into place over the last year with all ports.

 

 

The port agreements based on the CDC CSO. Now that it is in jeopardy, everything based on it is also crumbling.

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, balcony bound said:

 

That is old... prior to vaccinations.  Things have changed.

but but but... You can't assume vaccinations. Vaccinations aren't required for planes, trains, automobiles.

[TNcruising02]

The unvaccinated can be tested before boarding and retested every two days until the end of the cruise. That would solve the problem of people being deathly afraid of an unvaccinated person going from testing negative to being super spreader with 100s of people infected during a 7 day cruise.  Really, all of this drama is so over the top regarding positive cases.  I can see if it's a month long cruise, but a week?  Seriously?  I think it's over the top hysterical fear that things will go from testing negative to shutting down a cruise ship in 7 days.

[ColeThornton]

3 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

but but but... The judge referenced it. Cruise lines have to prepare for the least common denominator. Ports, too. Get ready for bondage.

 

I'll wear a mask but no one is tying me up.

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, balcony bound said:

 

We all need to get back to managing ourselves without assistance.

An anarchist's dream.

[BlerkOne]

3 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:

The unvaccinated can be tested before boarding and retested every two days until the end of the cruise. That would solve the problem of people being deathly afraid of an unvaccinated person going from testing negative to being super spreader with 100s of people infected during a 7 day cruise.  Really, all of this drama is so over the top regarding positive cases.  I can see if it's a month long cruise, but a week?  Seriously?  I think it's over the top hysterical fear that things will go from testing negative to shutting down a cruise ship in 7 days.

and we are back to cruise lines are required to have labs on the ship to process all the tests. Labs the judge thought were too burdensome.

[dandeck]

16 minutes ago, balcony bound said:

 

COVID will be around for years.  At the moment, the guidelines are two positives (or any number) will result in the passenger being quarantined until the next port, where they will be debarked. I don't think that guideline will change (but it could).  As you mentioned, positives were found even on a fully vaccinated ship.  It's going to happen.  Just like the flu, noro, common colds, etc. people get sick.  I got flu after my flu shot, I've already had COVID and the vaccine - doesn't mean I won't get it again.

 

There won't be any "rufusals for docking."  It has been reported that agreements have been put into place over the last year with all ports.

 

 

Kept to two because everyone was vaccinated was my point.  Otherwise it would of run through that ship like a norovirus does.  My guess is any docking agreements are probably with vaccinated ships.  Get a ship with multiple case outbreak and any such agreements probably wouldn't be worth the paper printed on! (-:  Cruise ships simply aren't the place for unvaccinated folks.  The beach had lots of distancing availability.  If one doesn't want to be vaccinated.  The industry simply isn't in position to accept the risk currently.