Court Reverses itself and tosses out Conditional Sail Order

[Hlitner]

I must admit that in my lifetime I have never seen anything quite like I read today.  The 11th Circuit Court's 3 judge panel that just last week stayed a Federal Judge's Order (Tampa) that essentially tossed out the Conditional Sail Order has now, without any explanation suddenly reversed itself.  You cannot make this stuff up!  Here is a late story on the situation:11th Circuit Jumps Ship on Its Own Order After Florida Urged SCOTUS to Lift CDC’s Cruise Restrictions (msn.com)

 

Federal Courts can do strange things but this is really unusual.  Since the Federal Judge from Tampa tossed out the Conditional Sail Order (other then as an advisory document) effective July 18 it would seem that effective immediately the CSO is no longer binding on any cruise line.  This is unreal and a huge defeat for the CDC whose authority to do a lot of what they do is now questionable.   A few of us here on CC have long questioned the legal authority of the CDC to unilaterally, and without due process, shut down the cruise industry.  It now seems that the Federal courts have reached a similar conclusion.  It will be interesting to see if the U.S. Department of Justice takes this to the Supreme Court on behalf of the CDC.  

 

Hank

P.S.  Just after I posted this story I noticed that Cruise Critic also has covered this under their "News."

Circuit Court Flips on Stay Order; Previous Ruling That CDC is Overstepping in Cruise Stands (cruisecritic.com)

[BoozinCroozin]

The injunction was done without reading through the details. The ruling at appeals was after detailed review of the evidence and findings. Regardless, the cruise lines are not abandoning what they are doing regardless of the ruling. The only thing it truly does is bring more ships online faster.

[ontheweb]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

I must admit that in my lifetime I have never seen anything quite like I read today.  The 11th Circuit Court's 3 judge panel that just last week stayed a Federal Judge's Order (Tampa) that essentially tossed out the Conditional Sail Order has now, without any explanation suddenly reversed itself.  You cannot make this stuff up!  Here is a late story on the situation:11th Circuit Jumps Ship on Its Own Order After Florida Urged SCOTUS to Lift CDC’s Cruise Restrictions (msn.com)

 

Federal Courts can do strange things but this is really unusual.  Since the Federal Judge from Tampa tossed out the Conditional Sail Order (other then as an advisory document) effective July 18 it would seem that effective immediately the CSO is no longer binding on any cruise line.  This is unreal and a huge defeat for the CDC whose authority to do a lot of what they do is now questionable.   A few of us here on CC have long questioned the legal authority of the CDC to unilaterally, and without due process, shut down the cruise industry.  It now seems that the Federal courts have reached a similar conclusion.  It will be interesting to see if the U.S. Department of Justice takes this to the Supreme Court on behalf of the CDC.  

 

Hank

P.S.  Just after I posted this story I noticed that Cruise Critic also has covered this under their "News."

Circuit Court Flips on Stay Order; Previous Ruling That CDC is Overstepping in Cruise Stands (cruisecritic.com)

First there was a CSO

Then there was no CSO 

 

to be sung to the tune of First There Was a Mountain by Donovan, but if it drags on even longer to other courts and eventually the Supreme Court, play it to Mountain Jam by the Allman Brothers Band.

 

Will it someday be

First there was a CSO

Then there was no CSO

And then there was

[Honolulu Blue]

Forgive me as I tune out the noise that's come from Florida and Georgia (and, soon, Washington).  I see little change in the short or medium run, unless this variant decides to burn itself out and the CSO gets pitched.

[ColeThornton]

9 hours ago, Hlitner said:

just after I posted this story I noticed that Cruise Critic also has covered this under their "News."

 

Yes, that's the correct forum for it.

 

Thanks Hank.

Edited July 24, 2021 by ColeThornton

[rkacruiser]

16 hours ago, Hlitner said:

It will be interesting to see if the U.S. Department of Justice takes this to the Supreme Court on behalf of the CDC.  

 

It will be interesting to see what the next Act of this drama will be.  Since the Supreme Court is in its usual Summer recess, I assume that the Justice overseeing the Federal Courts of Florida could make a decision.  If so, whichever Party is ruled against could appeal to the entire Court.  But, when would the Court hear the arguments?  Then, when would they rule?  And, the drama continues and continues.  (I need to get more popcorn.)  

[Hlitner]

43 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

It will be interesting to see what the next Act of this drama will be.  Since the Supreme Court is in its usual Summer recess, I assume that the Justice overseeing the Federal Courts of Florida could make a decision.  If so, whichever Party is ruled against could appeal to the entire Court.  But, when would the Court hear the arguments?  Then, when would they rule?  And, the drama continues and continues.  (I need to get more popcorn.)  

It is all over for now unless DOJ decides to take it to the Supreme Court.  The reversal by the 3 judge panel makes Florida's appeal to Justice Thomas...moot.   Since the Court of Appeals has now upheld the District judges decision (in favor of Florida) there is nowhere for the DOJ to go other then the Supremes.

 

Hank

[Toofarfromthesea]

55 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

It is all over for now unless DOJ decides to take it to the Supreme Court.  The reversal by the 3 judge panel makes Florida's appeal to Justice Thomas...moot.   Since the Court of Appeals has now upheld the District judges decision (in favor of Florida) there is nowhere for the DOJ to go other then the Supremes.

 

Hank

I don't think it is a coincidence that the 11the circuit reversed itself the same day Florida appealed to the Supreme Court.

[rkacruiser]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

It is all over for now unless DOJ decides to take it to the Supreme Court.  The reversal by the 3 judge panel makes Florida's appeal to Justice Thomas...moot.   Since the Court of Appeals has now upheld the District judges decision (in favor of Florida) there is nowhere for the DOJ to go other then the Supremes.

 

Hank

 

Yet, I wonder, the bureaucracy of the CDC has consistently tried to establish the principle of "its our way or the highway".  A different Administration now than when this drama began, will the  whomever(s) in the CDC that have been "calling the shots" on the cruise ship issue lack their influence with the current DOJ?  

 

 

[chengkp75]

In response to the Circuit Court's reversal, the CDC has stated this:

 

 "CDC also said cruise ships not following its order must abide by other requirements including "reporting of individual cases of illness or death and ship inspections and sanitary measures to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases."

 

This is what I predicted, the CDC is falling back on the specific language of the Public Health Act, as demanded by Judge Merryday, and will be making sanitation inspections and health interviews on those cruise ships that are not following the CSO protocols, every time the ship enters the US, as is their mandate under the PHA for granting free pratique.

[DirtyDawg]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

In response to the Circuit Court's reversal, the CDC has stated this:

 

 "CDC also said cruise ships not following its order must abide by other requirements including "reporting of individual cases of illness or death and ship inspections and sanitary measures to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases."

 

This is what I predicted, the CDC is falling back on the specific language of the Public Health Act, as demanded by Judge Merryday, and will be making sanitation inspections and health interviews on those cruise ships that are not following the CSO protocols, every time the ship enters the US, as is their mandate under the PHA for granting free pratique.

Hi  @chengkp75 , would these sanitation inspections and health interviews be harder on the cruise lines vs. the CSO? i.e. operationally or PR?

 

 

[chengkp75]

27 minutes ago, DirtyDawg said:

Hi  @chengkp75 , would these sanitation inspections and health interviews be harder on the cruise lines vs. the CSO? i.e. operationally or PR?

 

 

The CSO is much like the CDC's VSP.  If you follow the protocols, we only randomly inspect the ships.  If you don't, then we can do a full sanitation inspection, including health interviews with a selection of crew and pax, and delay clearance of the ship, and departure of the pax until the inspection is done, every single time the ship enters the US (at least each cruise, or more often if more than one US port).  I would say that operationally and PR, it will be worse for the cruise lines.

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

The CSO is much like the CDC's VSP.  If you follow the protocols, we only randomly inspect the ships.  If you don't, then we can do a full sanitation inspection, including health interviews with a selection of crew and pax, and delay clearance of the ship, and departure of the pax until the inspection is done, every single time the ship enters the US (at least each cruise, or more often if more than one US port).  I would say that operationally and PR, it will be worse for the cruise lines.

Sounds a lot worse for the cruise lines to me. It really does not sound like they want to go off the protocols even before this new development.

[Midwestern Cruiser]

8 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Sounds a lot worse for the cruise lines to me. It really does not sound like they want to go off the protocols even before this new development.

 

Agree -- they don't -- and their plans to deal with not being allowed to require vaccination will only serve to harm (money and masks) those who are not vaccinated, still leaving some risk for those who are.  Plus, I'm hearing more people who hope to sail on a 95%+ vaccinated cruise than not.

[Hlitner]

A couple of months ago I essentially through my hands up in the air, said to myself that enough was enough, and cancelled our October MSC cruise out of Miami.  At the time my thinking was that the CDC and the US Cruise industry was "wishy washy" (for lack of a better term) and I no longer wanted to deal with policies and procedures that seemed to change by the day.  As frequent cruisers (and addicted cruise lovers) we decided that in the immediate term our only decent option was to go on cruises that are outside of the jurisdiction of the CDC.  Accordingly that October cancellation turned into a different 14 day Caribbean cruise which embarks/disembarks from Barbados and avoids all the US Ports.  Our other cruise (within days) is in Greece which is also well outside of the reach of our CDC.  Trying to deal with the Barbados rules (another challenge) and lousy air connections to that island are also a challenge but seems like a better option then waiting for our CDC to drop another hammer.

 

This makes me somewhat sad because I am a proud American who does not like being driven out of my own country to resume cruising.   Traveling and cruising in this COVID world is a challenge and just keeping up with the changing rules (all over the world) requires daily work.  The reward is worth it (to finally gat aboard a cruise ship) and I now fear this is how it will be for the next few years!  We also have a cruise booked in December and another next April that are both in jeopardy (we have already had 5 cruises cancelled because of COVID). 

 

So we have a choice.  We can choose to sit home (and even hide in our basement) and wait for this COVID thing to blow over.  But that may take many years (this sounds pessimistic but that is the reality) and those who choose to sit and wait may well find that they have lost many valuable years (sitting and waiting for what may never happen).  

 

The situation in Florida with the State, the CDC, the DOJ. and the courts is almost comical except that it is very serious stuff.  For now I have few answers although my instincts still say that it is best to get outside of the long arm of the CDC.   We are already working on "Plan B" in the likely event that our April cruise will also be canceled (by the cruise line).  Whatever we decide for that Plan B will also likely take us far outside the long arm of the CDC.  I know they mean well, but I also think they are an agency out of control like a ship that has lost its rudder.  I felt somewhat vindicated to read the decision of the Federal judge in Tampa who essentially reached a similar conclusion.

 

Hank 

[Midwestern Cruiser]

Not sure I see how the CDC can both 'mean well' and be 'out of control' at the same time -- especially when cruise lines and passengers (80% in a survey done by this hosting site) want the restrictions.  Further, the lines say they'll continue to follow the 'rules' no matter how the lawsuit ends.

 

A law that prevents an industry from harming its customers is one thing.  But, in this case, as clearly stated in NCL's lawsuit, the industry is trying to prevent harm, and (IMO) it seems only its customers can call foul with how they do it.  Plus, we have other protective laws (seat belts, smoke detectors, child restraints), so getting outside of the CDC's reach sounds like simple rebellion.

 

Dealing with what's going on by not dealing with it doesn't seem like much of a reward.  Especially when many are dealing with it; not 'sitting home in their basement' ... many are cruising ... now ... from U.S. ports, with additional sailings being booked.

 

We all want to return to 'normal' sailing.  Vaccinated sailings allow that.

[Hlitner]

Those folks staying home and waiting for "normal" may find themselves still sitting home in 2 or 3 years and waiting for "normal."   When this COVID thing started I do not recall many folks who expected to still be dealing with these issues 19 months later.   I do agree that vaccinated sailings are a good idea and our next two cruises (both outside the USA) mandate that every soul aboard be fully vaccinated and also tested.   But nothing is normal.  As a simple example, Seabourn is now having weekly 7 day Caribbean cruises (back to back itineraries) out of Barbados.  But suddenly (last week) the British Virgin Islands (the Seabourn cruises have one BVI port every week) decided to not allow any cruise ships into their islands!  Why?  Because they have small surge in COVID cases ashore (nothing to do with cruise ships).   Another Caribbean port also stopped a ship from coming (with one day's notice) because of COVID issues ashore (again, nothing to do with the ship).

 

So "wanting to return to normal sailings" (to paraphrase the previous post) is a very nice Want...but I can think of many "wants"  that are just not realistic.  We need to work with the cards as they are dealt and not get hung up waiting for a Royal Flush which may never happen.

 

Hank

[cruisemom42]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

So "wanting to return to normal sailings" (to paraphrase the previous post) is a very nice Want...but I can think of many "wants"  that are just not realistic. 

 

No offense, but that sounds a bit like it could refer to you. 😁 It's all very nice to want to return to normal, but we just aren't there yet. Watching all your perambulations with your summer sailings.... 

 

Despite all your fulminating against the CDC, it's clear that many other countries are also being cautious.

[Hlitner]

26 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

No offense, but that sounds a bit like it could refer to you. 😁 It's all very nice to want to return to normal, but we just aren't there yet. Watching all your perambulations with your summer sailings.... 

 

Despite all your fulminating against the CDC, it's clear that many other countries are also being cautious.

With all due respect (and I have nothing but respect for you) I think there is not going to be any return to what most would consider normal for many years.   I actually agree with caution, but that does not necessarily mean abandoning travel.  One can travel with some degree of caution while acknowledging that any travel involves more risk then staying home.  Like most folks, we would love to see a return to what we used to consider normal but we do not see that in the cards for a long time...very possibly after some of us are long gone from this earth.   If you want to return to Italy you can do it in a few days and have freedom of movement within the country as long as you abide by local COVID restrictions.  You could fly to Greece or Croatia tomorrow and travel freely with the countries.   Is your risk much greater when traveling then not traveling?  There are certainly more hassles to traveling in the current world, but COVID risk exists whether you are at your local Supermarket or at an outdoor cafe near the Campo de Fiori.  

 

It seems like a lot of basic rules have changed (some for the better and others not so good) and I do not think there is any going back.  Trying to draw the line between reasonable caution and the absurd quest for zero risk has now become very difficult for politicians and many other folks.  Folks are either going to adjust to living with this darn disease or not!   For us, adjusting has not meant putting our life on hold but it certainly has had an impact on our planning.  We have friends who have essentially spent the last 18 months of their lives sitting at home (except when absolutely necessary to go out).  That is their choice but not the way we want to live.

 

Hank

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

With all due respect (and I have nothing but respect for you) I think there is not going to be any return to what most would consider normal for many years.   I actually agree with caution, but that does not necessarily mean abandoning travel.  One can travel with some degree of caution while acknowledging that any travel involves more risk then staying home.  Like most folks, we would love to see a return to what we used to consider normal but we do not see that in the cards for a long time...very possibly after some of us are long gone from this earth.   If you want to return to Italy you can do it in a few days and have freedom of movement within the country as long as you abide by local COVID restrictions.  You could fly to Greece or Croatia tomorrow and travel freely with the countries.   Is your risk much greater when traveling then not traveling?  There are certainly more hassles to traveling in the current world, but COVID risk exists whether you are at your local Supermarket or at an outdoor cafe near the Campo de Fiori.  

 

It seems like a lot of basic rules have changed (some for the better and others not so good) and I do not think there is any going back.  Trying to draw the line between reasonable caution and the absurd quest for zero risk has now become very difficult for politicians and many other folks.  Folks are either going to adjust to living with this darn disease or not!   For us, adjusting has not meant putting our life on hold but it certainly has had an impact on our planning.  We have friends who have essentially spent the last 18 months of their lives sitting at home (except when absolutely necessary to go out).  That is their choice but not the way we want to live.

 

Hank

 

At this point it is not so much the risk that stops me as the absurdities of trying to plan any travel. Requirements change daily. Who's to say what test will be required (and how many hours in advance), what app I'll need, or what quarantine will mean even by next week, let alone in a few months. Sure, one can travel "freely" (with appropriately complete form and code, with vaccination card, or alternatively with test) between the Greek isles and mainland, as of now, but who's to say that won't change again shortly if COVID cases continue to rise?

 

Let's say I plan a trip for November only to find out in October that I'll need a COVID booster that won't be available to me until December!  Or that I plan a trip to Rome primarily to see a specific exhibition, only to find out two weeks before I leave that rising COVID cases have caused Italy to close its museums again...

 

Maybe if I were in your situation I would feel more as you do. As it is, I have a job that keeps me quite busy about 55 hours (at a minimum) every week. I don't have either the inherent flexibility or the extra time that goes hand-in-hand with retirement. I "invest" a lot of time and planning when I travel, and I'm not willing to let all that be swept aside simply because Italy or France or Germany has decided this week to add additional onerous requirements.

 

I'm also relatively young and relatively healthy. Anything can happen, but there's every likelihood that I'll live to travel again next year or the year after.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2021 by cruisemom42

[Hlitner]

12 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

At this point it is not so much the risk that stops me as the absurdities of trying to plan any travel. Requirements change daily. Who's to say what test will be required (and how many hours in advance), what app I'll need, or what quarantine will mean even by next week, let alone in a few months. Sure, one can travel "freely" (with appropriately complete form and code, with vaccination card, or alternatively with test) between the Greek isles and mainland, as of now, but who's to say that won't change again shortly if COVID cases continue to rise?

 

Let's say I plan a trip for November only to find out in October that I'll need a COVID booster that won't be available to me until December!  Or that I plan a trip to Rome primarily to see a specific exhibition, only to find out two weeks before I leave that rising COVID cases have caused Italy to close its museums again...

 

Maybe if I were in your situation I would feel more as you do. As it is, I have a job that keeps me quite busy about 55 hours (at a minimum) every week. I don't have either the inherent flexibility or the extra time that goes hand-in-hand with retirement. I "invest" a lot of time and planning when I travel, and I'm not willing to let all that be swept aside simply because Italy or France or Germany has decided this week to add additional onerous requirements.

 

I'm also relatively young and relatively healthy. Anything can happen, but there's every likelihood that I'll live to travel again next year or the year after.

 

 

 

 

LOL (have to laugh because otherwise I would cry).   You do have a very good point.  Just this morning we received two e-mails from Seabourn about an upcoming cruise (this week) and my heart skipped a few beats as I opened up the PDF attachments.  Turned out to be nothing but a last minute health form but no question that there is anxiety related to the always possibility of changes in rules.

 

I was just looking at a Facebook posting relating to MSC.  The person (who is a very experienced travel agent now in Europe for a MSC cruise) just got an e-mail telling her that they need to purchase a MSC insurance policy (we are talking within a few days of the cruise) or be denied boarding!  or at least that seems to be the case.  These days nothing surprises.

 

 

Hank

[JRG]

Planning for cruises.   That's the name of the game.

 

 It can be done gracefully too as displayed in the preceding posts.

 

I agree that cruisers need to plan and that is really difficult right now causing frustration everywhere.

 

 

Edited July 28, 2021 by JRG

[rkacruiser]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

I think there is not going to be any return to what most would consider normal for many years. 

 

Sorry to have to say this, but I think at that this time, you are correct.  

 

4 hours ago, JRG said:

I agree that cruisers need to plan and that is really difficult right now causing frustration everywhere.

 

So, do we need a new definition of what a vacation is?  Planning for for a cruise or a vacation is not something new.  

 

If in this current Covid cruising world, we have to "plan" for additional "ifs" and "whatevers" and those lead to one frustration after another, the question ought to be asked by whomever is engaged in such an exercise:  is this what my "vacation" ought to be?  

[rkacruiser]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

With all due respect (and I have nothing but respect for you) I think there is not going to be any return to what most would consider normal for many years.

 

There is a short cut to normality.  Just as vaccinations have been and are required for so many diseases, there must be a mandatory requirement for ALL, with the exceptions of those who have medical or religious reasons, to accept the Covid vaccines.  

 

We license drivers, we require seat belt use, we mandate fliers to fasten their seat belts, restaurants and bars must have licenses in order to operate, doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. must have licenses to practice their profession.  Government requirements such as these are made for the COMMON good of all citizens.  

 

Why ought there be an exception for the Covid vaccination requirement?  

 

Oh, I know.  "It has not received full FDA approval".  What happens when that approval comes?  What will the excuses be then?  

[ontheweb]

6 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

There is a short cut to normality.  Just as vaccinations have been and are required for so many diseases, there must be a mandatory requirement for ALL, with the exceptions of those who have medical or religious reasons, to accept the Covid vaccines.  

 

We license drivers, we require seat belt use, we mandate fliers to fasten their seat belts, restaurants and bars must have licenses in order to operate, doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. must have licenses to practice their profession.  Government requirements such as these are made for the COMMON good of all citizens.  

 

Why ought there be an exception for the Covid vaccination requirement?  

 

Oh, I know.  "It has not received full FDA approval".  What happens when that approval comes?  What will the excuses be then?  

Are there religious exemptions for seat belt use, fliers fastening their seat belts, restaurants or bars to have licenses to operate, nurses, teachers, etc. to practice their professions? So why a religious exemption for the Covid vaccine.

 

A few years back when there was a measles outbreak in parts of NY state, NY did away with the religious exemption for school children (keeping of course the medical exemption). The courts upheld this as a legitimate state power to protect public health.