Implications for Royal on today's NCL lawsuit hearing

[jrapps]

Hearing is still going on, but the judge specifically asked the FL lawyer if Royal requiring vaccines for sailing to USVI was in violation of the law, and he said yes it was.

 

They also claimed that Carnival and any other line at any time "requiring" proof of vaccine violated the law.

 

Will be very interesting to see how this ends. 

 

 

[jrapps]

Hearing is over. No ruling yet of course, but will be interesting to see what happens next. If NCL wins this, I expect to see a lot more vaccine requirements. If FL wins, I expect to see something come out about Royals sailings to USVI since those would now violate FL law.

[Blizzard54]

My understanding is that Royal is not requiring proof of vaccine but if you give it you have different access onboard.

I have been out of touch this past week. Did Royal change their rules for USVI sailings?

[Espn]

At this point I don’t think it will matter by the next week or two if you are vaccinated or not on a cruise. We will all be following the same testing and masking protocols.

[jrapps]

14 minutes ago, Blizzard54 said:

My understanding is that Royal is not requiring proof of vaccine but if you give it you have different access onboard.

I have been out of touch this past week. Did Royal change their rules for USVI sailings?

The US Virgin Islands has not officially published their rules yet but they have given royal advanced heads up. From what has been released so far, The language indicates that the Virgin Islands are requiring proof of vaccination, not just asking you to verbally attest to it. If that is true then Royal will have to require documented proof.

 

But as I said until the Virgin Islands officially publishes their terminology a lot of this is up in the air.

 

It is worth noting even the way that Royal and carnival are asking people to prove their vaccination today is in violation of the law according to the lawyer in today's hearing. He seemed very ill-prepared, but his responses made it appear as if Even asking people to voluntarily show their card for different services violated the law.

[Blizzard54]

Would that imply that airlines can not ask if they are flying to a destination that requires vaccines? 

[flamingos]

Just now, Blizzard54 said:

Would that imply that airlines can not ask if they are flying to a destination that requires vaccines? 

Technically, yes - but they don't seem to have noticed that yet.  Why is he taking on cruise ships but not airlines?

 

[smokeybandit]

Is the USVI really requiring all those 12+ be vaccinated? Or is this like the St Kitts rule where RC said one thing and St Kitts said "um, that's not true"

[jrapps]

3 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Is the USVI really requiring all those 12+ be vaccinated? Or is this like the St Kitts rule where RC said one thing and St Kitts said "um, that's not true"

Multiple cruise lines are reporting it and have already sent letters to their customers. I guess officially it is unconfirmed until USVI publishes it, but it does not appear to be vaporware as the St. Kitts one was.

[Babr]

2 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

Is the USVI really requiring all those 12+ be vaccinated? Or is this like the St Kitts rule where RC said one thing and St Kitts said "um, that's not true"

USVI notified cruise lines that they plan to require fully vaccinated cruises for port entry. If that is the case, yes - anyone eligible for vaccine must comply. Otherwise, if the ships are denied entry, they will have to adjust itineraries.

[flamingos]

1 minute ago, Babr said:

USVI notified cruise lines that they plan to require fully vaccinated cruises for port entry. If that is the case, yes - anyone eligible for vaccine must comply. Otherwise, if the ships are denied entry, they will have to adjust itineraries.

 

This is the part that hangs me up.  If they need to be vaccinated at their destination, how can you do this without checking them as they board? It makes no sense. Is Florida now telling the cruise lines where they can and cannot stop?

 

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, flamingos said:

 

This is the part that hangs me up.  If they need to be vaccinated at their destination, how can you do this without checking them as they board? It makes no sense. Is Florida now telling the cruise lines where they can and cannot stop?

 

This is the part that will help NCL get the injunction. if USVI requires it, and FL tells them they can't ask for it, those mandates conflict. This is where federal law or guidelines typically take over to settle the conflict.

 

The judge seemed much more sympathetic to the CDCs role in establishing guidelines for cruising than judge Merryday was, even acknowledging in the hearing his ruling and saying that even if they are recommendations and not requirements, they are still federal guidelines and as such can be used to guide interpretation of how they are violated by FL law.

[Babr]

Just now, flamingos said:

 

This is the part that hangs me up.  If they need to be vaccinated at their destination, how can you do this without checking them as they board? It makes no sense. Is Florida now telling the cruise lines where they can and cannot stop?

 

The USV I plan forces the issue because cruise lines must verify the status of their passengers and deny passage to those who do not meet the requirements. Otherwise the ships can’t call on that port. They will be denied entry.

 

So, if the cruise lines must follow the law or be fined, then it seems Florida is exerting control of cruise line operations.

 

 

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, Babr said:

The USV I plan forces the issue because cruise lines must verify the status of their passengers and deny passage to those who do not meet the requirements. Otherwise the ships can’t call on that port. They will be denied entry.

 

So, if the cruise lines must follow the law or be fined, then it seems Florida is exerting control of cruise line operations.

 

 

The USVI requirement might have been very timely. Without it, this hearing may have gone a very different way. Of course, no ruling has been made yet...

[smokeybandit]

18 minutes ago, Babr said:

USVI notified cruise lines that they plan to require fully vaccinated cruises for port entry. If that is the case, yes - anyone eligible for vaccine must comply. Otherwise, if the ships are denied entry, they will have to adjust itineraries.

But it was reported that St Kitts notified cruise lines about its 700 passenger limits. This turned out to be false.

[Babr]

Just now, smokeybandit said:

But it was reported that St Kitts notified cruise lines about its 700 passenger limits. This turned out to be false.

I don’t know anything about that. I have read that the cruise lines have been informed by USVI officials of their plan.

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, smokeybandit said:

But it was reported that St Kitts notified cruise lines about its 700 passenger limits. This turned out to be false.

That doesn't mean this is also false.

 

The rules for port entry are often communicated directly to cruise lines and are not published. Same for Bahamas, their website claims that everyone needs a Covid test regardless of vaccination status, but the rules that apply to cruise ships can and are different and are not published on the Bahamas site.

 

Same for USVI. I have no idea what the St. Kitts situation was, but for now I'm putting this one in the true until proven otherwise category. St. Kitts came right out and refuted that story. There has been ample time for St. Thomas to do the same if this wasn't true. They have not done that. I doubt Royal would have sent letters to passengers telling them the must be vaccinated if they didn't get that from someone official It would put them in a very precarious legal situation with FL. 

[jrapps]

16 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

But it was reported that St Kitts notified cruise lines about its 700 passenger limits. This turned out to be false.

Also, as of now the only ships scheduled to dock in St. Thomas are Royal and Celebrity. Has Celebrity notified anyone 12+ who has not yet provided vaccine status that they now can not sail? (May be a question for the Celebrity forum)

[Sunshine3601]

2 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

Is the USVI really requiring all those 12+ be vaccinated? Or is this like the St Kitts rule where RC said one thing and St Kitts said "um, that's not true"

Considering other cruise lines are saying the same for St Thomas and St Kitts, I will believe Royal. 

[RoyalC]

3 hours ago, Blizzard54 said:

My understanding is that Royal is not requiring proof of vaccine but if you give it you have different access onboard.

I have been out of touch this past week. Did Royal change their rules for USVI sailings?

and other restrictions and costs. In other words, they are requiring it but will still let you sail.

[SherriZ366]

2 hours ago, jrapps said:

Also, as of now the only ships scheduled to dock in St. Thomas are Royal and Celebrity. Has Celebrity notified anyone 12+ who has not yet provided vaccine status that they now can not sail? (May be a question for the Celebrity forum)

Could you please give me a link to the St. Thomas docking schedule.  Thanks

[jrapps]

1 hour ago, SherriZ366 said:

Could you please give me a link to the St. Thomas docking schedule.  Thanks

https://crew-center.com/us-virgin-islands-cruise-ports-schedules-2021

[coffeebean]

6 hours ago, flamingos said:

 

This is the part that hangs me up.  If they need to be vaccinated at their destination, how can you do this without checking them as they board? It makes no sense. Is Florida now telling the cruise lines where they can and cannot stop?

 

Bingo. This is what it boils down to. Florida is overstepping and that is exactly why Florida sued the CDC.

[jrapps]

10 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

Bingo. This is what it boils down to. Florida is overstepping and that is exactly why Florida sued the CDC.

Timing is everything.

 

I have no doubt that the worsening situation with the Delta variant played a part in the tone of today's hearing. I truly wonder if the CDC lawsuit was happening now, with record outbreaks, double digit positive cases on cruise ships, every carnival ship being on yellow, and lines voluntarily imposing rules greater than CSO guidelines, if that would have played a part in that verdict.

[monn_a]

8 hours ago, flamingos said:

Technically, yes - but they don't seem to have noticed that yet.  Why is he taking on cruise ships but not airlines?

 

Maybe because airlines are outside of his jurisdiction.  They are bound by Federal mandates.🤷‍♂️