Florida goes to the Supreme Court

[njkruzer]

30 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Nothing in the Florida law, or the VSP/CSO, or anything is an issue for other than passenger vessels.  Every ship wishing to enter US waters (and even US flag coastwise shipping) still need to submit a Master's Attestation of Health to the USCG, who forwards it to the CDC, and then gives the ship clearance.  For cargo ships, CBP has their own health officers that do the sanitation inspections, and health interviews on a random basis, and can quarantine a vessel if required.  Nothing in all of this is applicable to cargo vessels.

 

However, the USCG issued a mask mandate for all US flag vessels a few months back, since amended as per CDC guidelines.  Under 42USC268, USCG officers are mandated to assist in enforcement of quarantine regulations.

Ok.  So who is responsible for health and safety requirements on the cruise ships?  I know USCG does inspections. Under what authority?  I'm confused. 

[Pratique]

52 minutes ago, Babr said:

In what way has Florida stepped up and taken responsibility for public health regarding cruising? I am not aware of anything except the prohibition of inquiring about vaccine status in order to deny service. How does that protect public health?

You’ll have to ask them. The state is adamant in court and in public statements  that the CSO is unnecessary and they are fighting it tooth and nail. It’s not clear what level of cruise line oversight the state would accept from CDC if any or how it dovetails into what the state is doing to get cruising going again safely.

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, njkruzer said:

Ok.  So who is responsible for health and safety requirements on the cruise ships?  I know USCG does inspections. Under what authority?  I'm confused. 

The USCG does inspections under their authority as "Port State Control", but it is to ensure that SOLAS and other international conventions are being followed on the ships, not that any US law or regulation is being followed, since they have no jurisdiction to enforce USCG regulations on foreign ships.  The health and sanitation inspections on cruise ships are done by the USPH  Commissioned Corps, which is a uniformed service of the US government, under the US Public Health Service, which is a part of the Department of HHS.  The USPH officers inspect to ensure that the CDC's Vessel Sanitation Program (VSP) are being followed.  CDC is also part of USPHS.  When any ship wants to enter US waters, it must apply for clearance from the USCG.  Part of that clearance process entails an attestation from the ship's Master that the passengers and crew are healthy.  USCG forwards this attestation to CDC for review, and determination of whether the ship should be cleared into US waters (granted "free pratique"), or quarantined for inspection.  USCG also forwards documents to CBP for their approval, and when all agencies agree, the USCG issues the clearance for the ship to enter US waters.

 

All of this is set out by the various Public Health Acts.

[njkruzer]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

The USCG does inspections under their authority as "Port State Control", but it is to ensure that SOLAS and other international conventions are being followed on the ships, not that any US law or regulation is being followed, since they have no jurisdiction to enforce USCG regulations on foreign ships.  The health and sanitation inspections on cruise ships are done by the USPH  Commissioned Corps, which is a uniformed service of the US government, under the US Public Health Service, which is a part of the Department of HHS.  The USPH officers inspect to ensure that the CDC's Vessel Sanitation Program (VSP) are being followed.  CDC is also part of USPHS.  When any ship wants to enter US waters, it must apply for clearance from the USCG.  Part of that clearance process entails an attestation from the ship's Master that the passengers and crew are healthy.  USCG forwards this attestation to CDC for review, and determination of whether the ship should be cleared into US waters (granted "free pratique"), or quarantined for inspection.  USCG also forwards documents to CBP for their approval, and when all agencies agree, the USCG issues the clearance for the ship to enter US waters.

 

All of this is set out by the various Public Health Acts.

Thanks.  So cdc is operating under USPH riues and Dept of HHS.  

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, njkruzer said:

Thanks.  So cdc is operating under USPH riues and Dept of HHS.  

CDC is operating under authority of the USPHS and HHS, but CDC formulates the regulations and USPH enforces.

[At Sea At Peace]

10 hours ago, Pratique said:

And yet the injunction only applies to Florida. Go figure.

 

There is nothing to figure.  The litigation was state specific.  To apply such across all states and territories is simply not how it works.  No one is required to go to Florida to cruise, vacation or spend the winter.  Everyone has a choice to not go.  That is quite simple.

 

[At Sea At Peace]

10 hours ago, dswallow said:

 

You're mischaracterizing the argument. They are different. The cruise lines simply are not transportation conveyances in any way like airlines, trains, buses or ferryboats. The cruise ships are vacation destinations that happen to move, too.

But the argument over the draconian CDC behavior with regard to cruise ships was always that they placed almost no controls whatsoever on any real transportation conveyances; no testing, no vaccination requirements, no rules to clean airliners/trains/buses if later someone was found testing positive. And they were never shut down for 18 months. Nothing.

 

Well said.

[At Sea At Peace]

12 hours ago, Pratique said:

The judge was not buying Florida's story today.

 

 

Again, if the Judge's "Order" is actually read, he laid out a pretty illustrative list of potentially violation-type actions (i.e. an ON NOTICE to the CDC regrading any such behavior).

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nessa1dc]

Ok....so...what does this mean?  I'm not travelling out of Florida, and wont be, too confusing.  I will be leaving out of NJ.  I am vaccinated, I don't want to be around a lot of people who are not, and I'm leaving in Oct. 21.  I am ready to go.  What's going on in NJ?

[Pratique]

2 hours ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

Again, if the Judge's "Order" is actually read, he laid out a pretty illustrative list of potentially violation-type actions (i.e. an ON NOTICE to the CDC regrading any such behavior).

Again, the judge wasn’t buying Florida”s story yesterday. It’s pretty simple.

[The Scurvy Pirate]

The Court simply deferred Florida's Motion to enforce the preliminary injunction.  The Court noted "Florida's motion seems, in light of assurances offered by CDC's counsel at today's hearing, to anticipate a violation that has not occurred and that might not occur."  I am not sure what "assurances" CDC's counsel offered, but the Judge was very clear that the CDC cannot "punish, harass or retaliate against a ship operator for not voluntarily complying with the conditional sailing order, Dear Colleague letter, or a later message from the CDC directed to a similar end."

 

It would be interesting to see what "assurances" counsel for CDC gave to the Court.  From the language of the order, I would think the CDC said it will not treat a cruise line that doesn't voluntarily comply any differently, but if there are issues, they will follow normal procedures.  They would not single out a particular cruise just for not voluntarily agreeing to the CSO, etc...  all speculation on my part as I don't know what was said to the judge.

 

But, it is seems clear to me, the Judge is keeping the CDC on a very short leash...

Edited July 27, 2021 by The Scurvy Pirate

[Pratique]

7 minutes ago, The Scurvy Pirate said:

The Court simply deferred Florida's Motion to enforce the preliminary injunction.  The Court noted "Florida's motion seems, in light of assurances offered by CDC's counsel at today's hearing, to anticipate a violation that has not occurred and that might not occur."  I am not sure what "assurances" CDC's counsel offered, but the Judge was very clear that the CDC cannot "punish, harass or retaliate against a ship operator for not voluntarily complying with the conditional sailing order, Dear Colleague letter, or a later message from the CDC directed to a similar end."

 

It would be interesting to see what "assurances" counsel for CDC gave to the Court.  From the language of the order, I would think the CDC said it will not treat a cruise line that doesn't voluntarily comply any differently, but if there are issues, they will follow normal procedures.  They would not single out a particular cruise just for not voluntarily agreeing to the CSO, etc...  all speculation on my part as I don't know what was said to the judge.

 

But, it is seems clear to me, the Judge is keeping the CDC on a very short leash...

The assurances included a follow-up letter from CDC to the cruise lines clarifying the first letter, and that CDC still has the authority to inspect and quarantine individual ships.

 

This will come home to roost when CDC starts inspecting and quarantining individual ships as it has the authority to do.

[Pratique]

1 hour ago, Nessa1dc said:

Ok....so...what does this mean?  I'm not travelling out of Florida, and wont be, too confusing.  I will be leaving out of NJ.  I am vaccinated, I don't want to be around a lot of people who are not, and I'm leaving in Oct. 21.  I am ready to go.  What's going on in NJ?

All of this is still in a state of flux. Things could be different by October, which is near the expiration of the current CSO.

[The Scurvy Pirate]

5 minutes ago, Pratique said:

The assurances included a follow-up letter from CDC to the cruise lines clarifying the first letter, and that CDC still has the authority to inspect and quarantine individual ships.

 

This will come home to roost when CDC starts inspecting and quarantining individual ships as it has the authority to do.

It will sure make for an interesting next couple of weeks as more ships leave and try to come back.  Hopefully by the time I leave in October some of the issues will be worked out...

[JemzRoo]

1 hour ago, Nessa1dc said:

Ok....so...what does this mean?  I'm not travelling out of Florida, and wont be, too confusing.  I will be leaving out of NJ.  I am vaccinated, I don't want to be around a lot of people who are not, and I'm leaving in Oct. 21.  I am ready to go.  What's going on in NJ?

This is my concern as well. I have a sailing on Oasis out of NJ 9/12/21. The first test sailing is the last week of August, so at this point there's no word on requirements or if the sailing will actually even happen. 

[Pratique]

2 minutes ago, The Scurvy Pirate said:

It will sure make for an interesting next couple of weeks as more ships leave and try to come back.  Hopefully by the time I leave in October some of the issues will be worked out...

Indeed.

[At Sea At Peace]

1 hour ago, Pratique said:

Again, the judge wasn’t buying Florida”s story yesterday. It’s pretty simple.

 

I like to post the actual court documents.  Then readers that want to get the pure, unadulterated facts, rather others so many and repetitive cursory perspectives (without evidence); which is what Florida gets accused of (incorrectly).  

 

29 minutes ago, The Scurvy Pirate said:

The Court simply deferred Florida's Motion to enforce the preliminary injunction.  The Court noted "Florida's motion seems, in light of assurances offered by CDC's counsel at today's hearing, to anticipate a violation that has not occurred and that might not occur."  I am not sure what "assurances" CDC's counsel offered, but the Judge was very clear that the CDC cannot "punish, harass or retaliate against a ship operator for not voluntarily complying with the conditional sailing order, Dear Colleague letter, or a later message from the CDC directed to a similar end."

 

It would be interesting to see what "assurances" counsel for CDC gave to the Court.  From the language of the order, I would think the CDC said it will not treat a cruise line that doesn't voluntarily comply any differently, but if there are issues, they will follow normal procedures.  They would not single out a particular cruise just for not voluntarily agreeing to the CSO, etc...  all speculation on my part as I don't know what was said to the judge.

 

But, it is seems clear to me, the Judge is keeping the CDC on a very short leash...

 

Thank you for referencing the court document to support your position.

[BecciBoo]

Latest according to Matt:  CSO is rescinded and is now only recommendation.  Date on this is  today.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pjy6VQ5Drc

 

[Pratique]

24 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

I like to post the actual court documents.  Then readers that want to get the pure, unadulterated facts, rather others so many and repetitive cursory perspectives (without evidence); which is what Florida gets accused of (incorrectly).  

 

 

Thank you for referencing the court document to support your position.

Then you should also post Florida's motion to enforce the injunction, which the judge disagreed with. You are being selective here.

[At Sea At Peace]

18 minutes ago, Pratique said:

Then you should also post Florida's motion to enforce the injunction, which the judge disagreed with. You are being selective here.

 

I wasn't the one selectively commenting on what what opined that the "Judge" meant or inferred by his Order.  

 

24/7/365  🙄

 

I like Florida.

 

I like cruising.

 

[dswallow]

2 hours ago, Nessa1dc said:

Ok....so...what does this mean?  I'm not travelling out of Florida, and wont be, too confusing.  I will be leaving out of NJ.  I am vaccinated, I don't want to be around a lot of people who are not, and I'm leaving in Oct. 21.  I am ready to go.  What's going on in NJ?

 

1 hour ago, JemzRoo said:

This is my concern as well. I have a sailing on Oasis out of NJ 9/12/21. The first test sailing is the last week of August, so at this point there's no word on requirements or if the sailing will actually even happen. 

 

The preliminary injunction has no effect on sailings from New Jersey or Maryland or Texas or Washington or any other state except Florida. At best it may be argued that a sailing from one of those ports that visits a port in Florida falls under the preliminary injunction.

 

But at the moment no cruise line has said anything other than they are following the CSO, even in Florida. It currently has no effect on any current sailings or plans for sailings until a cruise line decides to sail without consideration for the CSO.

[kearney]

1 hour ago, Pratique said:

Then you should also post Florida's motion to enforce the injunction, which the judge disagreed with. You are being selective here.

Well please post it.

[kearney]

13 minutes ago, dswallow said:

 

 

The preliminary injunction has no effect on sailings from New Jersey or Maryland or Texas or Washington or any other state except Florida. At best it may be argued that a sailing from one of those ports that visits a port in Florida falls under the preliminary injunction.

 

But at the moment no cruise line has said anything other than they are following the CSO, even in Florida. It currently has no effect on any current sailings or plans for sailings until a cruise line decides to sail without consideration for the CSO.

A lot of legal back and forth... but again I say.. cruise lines have protocols in place... passengers see what they are and have signed up...regardless of what is being required... I don't see any cruise line doing something different than outlined in the CSO... but it is interesting to read about all the back and forth...but bottom line... no one is going to go out on their own until this thing is well past us.... My fear is that the Nassau cruises will add masking..if the CDC adds this back later today.

[dswallow]

Everything:

Florida v. HHS, CDC (8:21-cv-00839) (2150.com)

US Court of Appeals, 11th District, Case 12243, Florida v. HHS, CDC (2150.com)

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd et al v. Rivkees, M.D. (1:21-cv-22492) (2150.com)

[ArthurUSCG]

21 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Actually, the manpower would come first from the USPH Commissioned Corps, which supplies the inspectors for the CDC's VSP (which, conveniently, no one seems to have an issue with, and which is startingly similar to the CSO, hmmm).  The budget would come from the USPHS.  If there were manpower or budget shortages, that would just lead to longer quarantine waits for ships to be cleared.  Additional manpower could come from USCG and CBP, and even FDA inspectors, who do the same thing for US flag cruise ships as the USPH does for foreign ships.

I'm assuming based on how small the USPHS is, that the actual work would fall upon the USCG personal with a member of the USPHS overseeing the operation. Sort of like how a USCG Chief can be in charge of a carrier group and use the Navy personal  to conduct USCG inspections.