NCL suing Florida over vaccine law.

[3kidsncats]

5 minutes ago, mauraoel said:

They are sending out emails just like RCCL they are catching that "51" person before they get to Florida.  But considering that the first cruise was 99% I don't think they are really worried about getting less that 95%

But still potentially refusing service based on vaccine status.  Not sure where the cruise fare payment process location is, which could give a legal argument that it’s not a violation of Florida law if payment is processed in a different state.  This is one of the gray areas — if NCL headquarters their payment processing out of Florida, and other cruise lines don’t, that could factor in.  You have a situation where people pay in one location, board in another, and some services are provided on international waters.  Where does and doesn’t the law apply?  Does Florida have jurisdiction over what also amounts to a CBP area given the international waters element.  
 

 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

It is only my opinion but I believe the Florida law was not designed for the cruise industry but rather other areas that operate on land in the state of Florida. 

[3kidsncats]

5 minutes ago, smplybcause said:

 

But I'm pretty sure I heard DeSantis say more than once it included them. Admittedly I tune him out when he's on the noon news, but some things make it through lol

I believe you are correct

[Goodtime Cruizin]

A wink & a nod. Most can see through it. RCL & Clebrity sure have. 

[At Sea At Peace]

1 hour ago, Iamcruzin said:

This wasn't picked up on the now closed NCL thread on this topic.  Not to worry someone already started another one.  I hope the NCL passengers have the good sense to take a refund if their cruise is canceled and not roll it over to an FCC.

 

At this point in time, and considering the existing and prospective likelihood of the resumption of revenue sailings at a level of capacity required to stay solvent, with billions of new debt, and always being "one variant away from a return to wastelands," your recommendation to take the refund is wise.

 

I would add, for the same reasons, I would not be making any final payments either.

 

Absolutely love NCL, but it is what it is.

[coffeebean]

20 hours ago, ONECRUISER said:

I've counted 17 Threads closed in last 4wks, all were Vaccines and Politics.

Funny how those two subjects are intertwined.

[coffeebean]

19 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

agree.

They should do what RCI and Celebrity are doing. Tell us you are vaccinated and you will get to do more and be safe. Otherwise get insurance, take tests, let places on ship to go to.  hmmm NCL would rather have empty ships.  Too bad for them.  Glad I switched from NCL to RCI for my trip to Alaska.

I guess CCL which is even more liberal with protocols would make the NCL CEO sick to his stomach

I saw on the NCL forum a statement from can be expected from the NCL cruise vacation experience. NCL will not have any masking anywhere on the ship, no distancing with all the venues open and........wait for it............self serve buffet.

[deliver42]

Right now, I'd prefer NCL to Royal because Royal is trying to play both ends against the middle.The last Freedom cruise had only 90% vaccinated. Where will it end? Maybe 90% unvaccinated. Oh for the almighty buck. I'm booked and paid on the Ovation in Alaska, which is different. At the end of that cruise I'll be Diamond, but I don't care. NCL, if you win, here I come.

[coffeebean]

16 hours ago, PhoenixCruiser said:

I don't  think this will end well for Florida.

How can it end well for Florida when what they feel is best for individuals' freedoms goes totally against what is best for all individuals regarding their health and safety during a global pandemic? All my opinion.

 

 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

Buh-Bye!

[xpcdoojk]

I find so many of these posts to be simply amazing.  Like a washing machine in a busy laundromat.  Clothes spinning round and round and then dumped, then more quarters more clothes, and then dumped again.  

 

there was a song from the 80s by Animotion that seems to aptly describe this topic for some members.

 

 

[coffeebean]

10 hours ago, 4774Papa said:

Yes, other lines go with 95% vaccinated and require testing for all or at least the 5% that won't provide their vaccine status.    Also, if you can prove you have had COVID19 with antibodies, you can cruise.  Also, for kids under 12 they don't get to cruise?

I understand Florida's concern over the vaccine mandate.  I still think private corporations should have the option of setting their own policy, but the Florida vaccine law has loop  holes.

Really? Which cruise lines have stated this? Maybe that 20% isn't forgotten.

[jean87510]

14 minutes ago, xpcdoojk said:

I find so many of these posts to be simply amazing.  Like a washing machine in a busy laundromat.  Clothes spinning round and round and then dumped, then more quarters more clothes, and then dumped again.  

 

there was a song from the 80s by Animotion that seems to aptly describe this topic for some members.

 

 

And the sad pathetic part is they actually think people are listening to them.

[4774Papa]

21 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

Really? Which cruise lines have stated this? Maybe that 20% isn't forgotten.

As I have already stated on this thread, I did read about this as an option, but can't remember now.   

[nelblu]

1 hour ago, coffeebean said:

How can it end well for Florida when what they feel is best for individuals' freedoms goes totally against what is best for all individuals regarding their health and safety during a global pandemic? All my opinion.

 

 

How many times must you repeat yourself not only on this thread but some of the closed ones..

[nelblu]

1 hour ago, deliver42 said:

The last Freedom cruise had only 90% vaccinated. Where will it end? Maybe 90% 

Based on the review of the Freedom sail ending on August 12 the count was 900 adults and 140 under age of 18.  If my math is correct the vaxxed % was 86.5.  The good news, although a 3 day jaunt, no infections as we know of.

[Tree_skier]

5 hours ago, 3kidsncats said:

Yes, if FL is not going to enforce the law, which is the point I’ve been making.  Thanks for helping me do that. 

It's not that they aren't enforcing the law.  The cruise lines aren't in violation of the law.  Why is this so hard.  Please supply one shred of evidence that they are turning a blind eye to the law.  I can't understand why this is the hill you want to die on.

[Tree_skier]

2 hours ago, xpcdoojk said:

I find so many of these posts to be simply amazing.  Like a washing machine in a busy laundromat.  Clothes spinning round and round and then dumped, then more quarters more clothes, and then dumped again.  

 

there was a song from the 80s by Animotion that seems to aptly describe this topic for some members.

 

 

The 80's were great!

 

 

[coffeebean]

12 hours ago, firefly333 said:

And exactly how is it that desantis caused this situation?

 

The 95% came from the cdc not from florida. It affects ports in other states. You give florida too much credit for what's going on.

 

It's why rcl who doesnt want to do the 95% is wearing masks and carnival and celebrity arent wearing masks .. nothing to do with florida.

 

Ncl can ask same like the others are asking. So far cruiselines are also asking in florida. To determine if they are at the 95%. So how is florida responsible for this mess? Makes no sense to me to sue right now... as I've posted, way late in filing. This should have been done before cruises restated. Now as someone above posted it might be excuses, finding someone to blame as they are rocky financially. 

Then why is it that the cruise lines have to "work around" the law? Why bother if it is not Florida's law that is at the root of all the difficulties for the cruise lines? Why is it that Celebrity had to call all their booked passengers out of Florida and ask them if they would provide their proof of vaccination? Why is it that this practice is not being used for any other state other than ships that are home ported in Florida?

 

If it were not for this Florida law, the cruise lines could come right out and require proof of vaccine. No need to dance around and need a "work around". This Florida law is creating more work for the cruise lines. How can Florida not be blamed for this fiasco?

[3kidsncats]

14 minutes ago, Tree_skier said:

It's not that they aren't enforcing the law.  The cruise lines aren't in violation of the law.  Why is this so hard.  Please supply one shred of evidence that they are turning a blind eye to the law.  I can't understand why this is the hill you want to die on.

Not sure why you think I’m dying on a hill.  Your opinion that the cruise lines aren’t in violation of the law is yours, not mine.  And until it is litigated, you can’t say it’s a fact that the cruise lines aren’t in violation.  When a new law is signed, the full parameters of how it will be legally interpreted aren’t known until the first case is settled, and precedent is made.  That has not yet happened.  So for now, all we have are our opinions, and mine is quite different than yours.  

[firefly333]

12 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

Then why is it that the cruise lines have to "work around" the law? Why bother if it is not Florida's law that is at the root of all the difficulties for the cruise lines? Why is it that Celebrity had to call all their booked passengers out of Florida and ask them if they would provide their proof of vaccination? Why is it that this practice is not being used for any other state other than ships that are home ported in Florida?

 

If it were not for this Florida law, the cruise lines could come right out and require proof of vaccine. No need to dance around and need a "work around". This Florida law is creating more work for the cruise lines. How can Florida not be blamed for this fiasco?

All what difficulty? Seems like Galveston and miami both looked at vaccine cards. What was the work around .. I dont see the difference in how they board. 

 

The passport is the federal government taking over. That's why texas and florida voted against the passport. This is a political play, nothing else. Going to turn off many would be cruisers. I know I wouldnt buy nclh stock when I see them playing politics. They need to remain unbiased politically imo. They shouldn't take sides. Business is getting in trouble doing this. I'm one who will remember this and not book because of this. I play the stock market and think it's bad business. My money my decision but I guarantee I'm not the only one turned off. Business needs to remain out of politics. I've seen posts on the ncl board so I'm sure I'm not the only one going whoa .. bad business to turn off half the voters and get involved. I dont care which side you are on.

 

Liking ccl and rcl a lot more for staying out of this. 

[Tree_skier]

17 minutes ago, 3kidsncats said:

Not sure why you think I’m dying on a hill.  Your opinion that the cruise lines aren’t in violation of the law is yours, not mine.  And until it is litigated, you can’t say it’s a fact that the cruise lines aren’t in violation.  When a new law is signed, the full parameters of how it will be legally interpreted aren’t known until the first case is settled, and precedent is made.  That has not yet happened.  So for now, all we have are our opinions, and mine is quite different than yours.  

So a law isn't a law until someone is charged and convicted of violating that law. Until then apporoved or acceptable behavior is just a pig in poke.

 

You didn't take civics in high school did you. LOL

 

The absence of enforcement of behavior isn't evidence of a violation of an untried law.  It is evidence that the behavior isn't in violation of the law.

 

But I'm done.   Have at it.  I'll let you have the last word because I'm sure that you are determined to have it.  

[dswallow]

NCLH has filed a motion to hold a status conference and included copies of an email chain attempting to open communication with the office in Florida. A little snit of sorts going on.

https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11_051023587474_MotionStatusConference.pdf
https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-1_051123587475_EmailChain.pdf
https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-2_051123587476_EmailChain.pdf


Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (2150.com)

[Tree_skier]

12 minutes ago, dswallow said:

NCLH has filed a motion to hold a status conference and included copies of an email chain attempting to open communication with the office in Florida. A little snit of sorts going on.

https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11_051023587474_MotionStatusConference.pdf
https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-1_051123587475_EmailChain.pdf
https://www.2150.com/files/cc/1-21-cv-22492-KMW-CMM/11-2_051123587476_EmailChain.pdf


Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (2150.com)

Well all I got out of that is Derek is an a$$

[3kidsncats]

5 minutes ago, Tree_skier said:

So a law isn't a law until someone is charged and convicted of violating that law. Until then apporoved or acceptable behavior is just a pig in poke.

 

You didn't take civics in high school did you. LOL

 

The absence of enforcement of behavior isn't evidence of a violation of an untried law.  It is evidence that the behavior isn't in violation of the law.

 

But I'm done.   Have at it.  I'll let you have the last word because I'm sure that you are determined to have it.  

I didn’t say it wasn’t a law, I said “ the full parameters of how it will be legally interpreted aren’t known”. I guess you aren’t familiar with the legal concept of precedent.   And absence of enforcement is not an indicator one way or the other.  Many cases are not litigated or criminally prosecuted for a variety of reasons, and not exclusively because something isn’t in violation.  
 

Apparently my civics instructor was more qualified than yours.