100 more days

[Billy Baltic]

I presume the CDC order is only valid in US waters?

[The Fun Researcher]

1 hour ago, Billy Baltic said:

I presume the CDC order is only valid in US waters?

 

Does this cover cruises out of San Juan?  We rebooked for July 26th.  We’re also  fine with cancelling if needed.

 

Dan

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Billy Baltic said:

I presume the CDC order is only valid in US waters?

Of course it is only valid in US waters, since the US has no jurisdiction anywhere else, though we may think so.

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, datolim said:

The CDC order states that cruise ships can't board passengers and return to their sailing schedules until one of three events takes place:

 

This looks like a very very serious matter.

100 days from Apr 14 means Jul 23.

In the mean time how many may die in the ships at sea if I read this news correctly.

Cannot be true!!!!!

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/cdc-extends-no-sail-order-for-cruise-ships-as-industry-ravaged-by-the-coronavirus/ar-BB12pv5w?ocid=spartandhp

Let's not get overly dramatic.  First off, this only applies to US waters, since the CDC has no jurisdiction anywhere else.

Reading the updated order from the CDC, it appears, to me at least, to be issued in order to stop sailings until the newly required action plans can be submitted and vetted.  The order can be changed or rescinded at any time by the CDC, as it states, and I believe with the acceptance of action plans, it will be.  When this will happen is uncertain, but may or may not last the full 100 days.  It is interesting to note that the order is specifically described as not a rule, but an emergency action, so I don't foresee that the required action plans, or most of its requirements, as being continued after the current health emergency is over.

 

Secondly, it does not "condemn" people to "die at sea", as it allows for disembarkation of passengers and crew "as approved by USCG".

 

[Billy Baltic]

14 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Of course it is only valid in US waters, since the US has no jurisdiction anywhere else, though we may think so.

Thanks for clarifying. 
I expect RC would meet CDC orders at all times but was curious if it may lead them to look outside the US for resumption of operations. 

[grapau27]

8 hours ago, reallyitsmema said:

 

I wouldn't let him out either!  I just hope you guys get to cruise again.  As of now, we are landlocked until they change the under 70 rule.  

 

 

UK passenger travel overseas is banned indefinitely.

Just cancelled our June cruise on Allure before final payment and got FCC for our deposit

Over 25,000 coronavirus deaths so far in Spain and Italy and rising every day so cannot see Allure going there anytime soon.

[maxsales]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Of course it is only valid in US waters, since the US has no jurisdiction anywhere else, though we may think so.

US may not have jurisdiction anywhere but the US however they have Hugh influence everywhere. Do you honestly think a mainstream cruise line such as RC wants to get in a pissing contest with the CDC?  
 

Think about it.  RC decides to go against the order and the State department or the coast guard or every other Us Government organization collectively determine that no RC ship will be allowed into a US port maybe forever. I think the threat of that happening would deter Cruise-lines from sailing during the duration of this order. 

 

in addition the state department can issue a no travel Order for American citizens relative to cruise ship travel world wide. That one mean if a US passport holder were to board a cruise sailing from a foreign port they would have to do so without the protection of the US government and most likely would not be able to protect their trip with travel insurance. Who, in their sound mind, would board a cruise ship under those terms?  Certainly an insufficient number to make the cruise cost effective for the cruise line. 

 

[firefox247]

3 hours ago, molly361 said:

Question is will Royal extend their closure now or wait until the end of the month??  Inquiring minds want to know.  Bye bye May cruise. 😇

 

My guess it that Royal continues to follow their 30 day at a time rule on cancelations. While the order likely makes a short term return more difficult, it isn't technically impossible given the three conditions

 

Royal needs cash. I don't see them canceling months more of cruises in their most profitable months until it is impossible for them to sail. 

[orville99]

The order was published in the Federal Register on March 14. The 100-day clock started on March 14. That would peg an end date as June 22.

Edited April 10, 2020 by orville99

[Tapi]

2 hours ago, The Fun Researcher said:

 

Does this cover cruises out of San Juan?  We rebooked for July 26th.  We’re also  fine with cancelling if needed.

 

Dan

Cruises out of San Juan are considered part of the U.S. so the answer to that is yes. Puerto Rico has some of the strictest measures in place in the USA and it’s jurisdictions, and the port of San Juan was one of the first to close. The good news is that they’ve been able to curve the number of cases and deaths better than any other place in the USA with those measures. 

Edited April 10, 2020 by Tapi

[KBD1516]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/04/09/coronavirus-cdc-extends-no-sail-order-cruise-ships/5128291002/
 

article in USA Today 

[chengkp75]

26 minutes ago, maxsales said:

US may not have jurisdiction anywhere but the US however they have Hugh influence everywhere. Do you honestly think a mainstream cruise line such as RC wants to get in a pissing contest with the CDC?  
 

Think about it.  RC decides to go against the order and the State department or the coast guard or every other Us Government organization collectively determine that no RC ship will be allowed into a US port maybe forever. I think the threat of that happening would deter Cruise-lines from sailing during the duration of this order. 

 

in addition the state department can issue a no travel Order for American citizens relative to cruise ship travel world wide. That one mean if a US passport holder were to board a cruise sailing from a foreign port they would have to do so without the protection of the US government and most likely would not be able to protect their trip with travel insurance. Who, in their sound mind, would board a cruise ship under those terms?  Certainly an insufficient number to make the cruise cost effective for the cruise line. 

 

You overstate the reach of government.  No government agency ruling would withstand a court challenge on the basis of "they weren't in our jurisdiction, but they disobeyed our restrictions anyway".  Not sure that the State Department can make a no travel order for a specific form of travel, as opposed to travel to a particular country.  News flash, when you cruise on a foreign flag cruise ship at any time, you do so without the protection of the US government.

[ATC cruiser]

Does anybody think that they were going on a cruise before July anyway. This really doesn’t change much. 

[sandebeach]

I briefly read through the 9 page PDF. Lots of things required for cruise ships to do or submit a plan for, but nowhere in the PDF did I see a requirement for passengers 70 and older, to require a doctor’s note to cruise. Or did I miss that somewhere in the CDC document?

Edited April 10, 2020 by sandebeach

[orville99]

14 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

You overstate the reach of government.  No government agency ruling would withstand a court challenge on the basis of "they weren't in our jurisdiction, but they disobeyed our restrictions anyway".  Not sure that the State Department can make a no travel order for a specific form of travel, as opposed to travel to a particular country.  News flash, when you cruise on a foreign flag cruise ship at any time, you do so without the protection of the US government.

Not disagreeing, but the U.S. does have the authority to close any or all of its ports of departure/arrival to any type of vessel if conditions warrant.

 

[orville99]

15 minutes ago, ATC cruiser said:

Does anybody think that they were going on a cruise before July anyway. This really doesn’t change much. 

The document reads like the CDC re-started the 100-day clock yesterday when it published the revision in the Federal Register, and if that is correct, the new end date would be July 18.

[ATC cruiser]

1 minute ago, orville99 said:

The document reads like the CDC re-started the 100-day clock yesterday when it published the revision in the Federal Register, and if that is correct, the new end date would be July 18.

Ok, I’ll change may post. Does anybody really think they were cruising before July 18th?

[little britain]

19 minutes ago, ATC cruiser said:

Does anybody think that they were going on a cruise before July anyway. This really doesn’t change much. 

 Article in Spanish saying spanish government are preparing a scenario of a summer without any foreign tourists ... El Gobierno prepara el escenario de un verano sin turismo exterior por el coronavirus
 

 

[S.A.M.J.R.]

12 minutes ago, orville99 said:

Not disagreeing, but the U.S. does have the authority to close any or all of its ports of departure/arrival to any type of vessel if conditions warrant.

 

That's not what chengkp75 was talking about anyway.  He was refuting PP's claim that the government could keep a US citizen from boarding a cruise ship in Spain, Australia, Japan, or any other foreign port.

[ToroAzul]

9 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Royal is giving away cruises thru the casino beginning July 14. Coincidence🤔

 

That's what I booked, fingers crossed.

[Milwaukee Eight]

9 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Royal is giving away cruises thru the casino beginning July 14. Coincidence🤔

Great point

 

In my opinion 

[orville99]

14 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

That's not what chengkp75 was talking about anyway.  He was refuting PP's claim that the government could keep a US citizen from boarding a cruise ship in Spain, Australia, Japan, or any other foreign port.

Which is why I was not disagreeing with him.

[bouhunter]

41 minutes ago, ATC cruiser said:

. This really doesn’t change much. 

No it doesn't.  And 100 days from now the debate here about when cruises will start will still go on.

Edited April 10, 2020 by bouhunter

[Ourusualbeach]

40 minutes ago, sandebeach said:

I briefly read through the 9 page PDF. Lots of things required for cruise ships to do or submit a plan for, but nowhere in the PDF did I see a requirement for passengers 70 and older, to require a doctor’s note to cruise. Or did I miss that somewhere in the CDC document?

Those restrictions were put in place by CLIA as part of their action plan and not by the CDC.  

 

 

[maxsales]

55 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

You overstate the reach of government.  No government agency ruling would withstand a court challenge on the basis of "they weren't in our jurisdiction, but they disobeyed our restrictions anyway".  Not sure that the State Department can make a no travel order for a specific form of travel, as opposed to travel to a particular country.  News flash, when you cruise on a foreign flag cruise ship at any time, you do so without the protection of the US government.

News flash, I am not overstating the reach of the US government I believe you are seriously underestimating it. Do you really think any cruise line wants to get in a pissing contest with the US government?  You know the government can close our ports, including Alaska and Hawaii to foreign  flagged vessels anytime time they want? 
Translation, cruise line denied entry cruise line out of business.