Judge: Florida and CDC Still At An Impass

[jsglow]

1 minute ago, BlerkOne said:

The mediation is over. The judge declared it so.

Thanks for the update.  Florida should prepare to lose then.

[BlerkOne]

14 minutes ago, IntrepidFromDC said:

According to my retired neighbor, who was a government lawyer for many years, government lawyers are less "hungry" (read aggressive/motivated) and are paid less than private practice in general.  

Probably true but I would think they would bring in hired guns for anything critical. Carnival has a herd of lawyers on staff, but when things go to trial, that's what they do.

[BlerkOne]

4 minutes ago, jsglow said:

Thanks for the update.  Florida should prepare to lose then.

You're welcome. According to this, the CDC was granted more time to argue (likely the covid cases on the recent cruise) and seems the judge may not decide before July 1.

 

https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/florida-vs-cdc-cruise-lawsuit-mediation-ends-at-an-impasse/

 

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by BlerkOne

[bamaone]

17 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

The CDC is data driven, not wild west, russian roulette, damn the torpedoes. Their job is to keep us safe.

FIFY

The CDC is suppose to be data driven

[Radiioman46]

CDC is political driven.

 

[ontheweb]

45 minutes ago, IntrepidFromDC said:

According to my retired neighbor, who was a government lawyer for many years, government lawyers are less "hungry" (read aggressive/motivated) and are paid less than private practice in general.  

That does not seem to apply to District Attorneys who are government lawyers.

[ontheweb]

28 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

You're welcome. According to this, the CDC was granted more time to argue (likely the covid cases on the recent cruise) and seems the judge may not decide before July 1.

 

https://www.wfla.com/community/health/coronavirus/florida-vs-cdc-cruise-lawsuit-mediation-ends-at-an-impasse/

 

 

Thanks for the citation. So now we do know for sure that the mediator could not bring the parties to agree. Actually, I think it was a hopeless cause.

[ontheweb]

49 minutes ago, IntrepidFromDC said:

According to my retired neighbor, who was a government lawyer for many years, government lawyers are less "hungry" (read aggressive/motivated) and are paid less than private practice in general.  

Aren't both the CDC lawyers and the lawyers for Florida government lawyers?

[Lee Cruiser]

1 hour ago, songbird1329 said:

Technically Texas and Alaska are not officially part of the lawsuit.  They sought permission to intervene, the CDC opposed it, and the judge has not yet ruled on the request to intervene.

 

The judge does not have the authority craft a solution here.  He can either grant a preliminary injunction which will prevent the CDC from enforcing the CSO, or he can deny Florida’s request.  
 

But given the extensive briefing and the very thorough oral argument, when the judge makes his ruling, there will be a very long judicial opinion describing his reasons for ruling as he did.

 

While I didn’t see the transcripts of oral argument, I read most of the briefs.  I think He’s going to rule against Florida, then deny the motions to intervene as moot.

 

 

 

It's sounds like you are one of the few of us posting that actually has a knowledge of the legals aspects.  Why does he not have the authority to craft a solution?

[ontheweb]

3 minutes ago, Lee Cruiser said:

It's sounds like you are one of the few of us posting that actually has a knowledge of the legals aspects.  Why does he not have the authority to craft a solution?

I'm not a legal expert, but I believe he was asked to order a temporary injunction, not to come up with a long or even short term solution. I think he hoped that the mediator could get the parties to agree and make the whole case moot.

[tidecat]

14 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I'm not a legal expert, but I believe he was asked to order a temporary injunction, not to come up with a long or even short term solution. I think he hoped that the mediator could get the parties to agree and make the whole case moot.

A judge can't write federal regulation; that's not a power given to the judicial branch. The judge can either stop enforcement of a regulation he/she determines to be unlawful or unconstitutional, confirm the regulation in question is valid, or get the parties in the suit to come to an agreement outside of a trial. It's possible part of the CSO is struck down, but more likely any changes would be by mutual agreement between the CDC and the industry.

[ontheweb]

1 minute ago, tidecat said:

A judge can't write federal regulation; that's not a power given to the judicial branch. The judge can either stop enforcement of a regulation he/she determines to be unlawful or unconstitutional, confirm the regulation in question is valid, or get the parties in the suit to come to an agreement outside of a trial. It's possible part of the CSO is struck down, but more likely any changes would be by mutual agreement between the CDC and the industry.

OK, thanks. You explained in more precise terms that I did. And I would assume the call for a mediator would be to hope to end the case by a mutual agreement. Though in this case since the state of Florida is bringing the case not the cruise lines. the agreement would be between the government agency and Florida. 

 

One of the perplexing things about the case has been that the cruise lines are not really directly involved.

[MrMarc]

17 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I'm not a legal expert, but I believe he was asked to order a temporary injunction, not to come up with a long or even short term solution. I think he hoped that the mediator could get the parties to agree and make the whole case moot.

Here is exactly what he has been asked to do:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For these reasons, Florida asks the Court to:

a) Hold unlawful and set aside the Conditional Sailing Order.

b) Issue preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Conditional Sailing Order.

c) Postpone the effective date of the Conditional Sailing Order.

 

In theory these are basically yes or no issues, however, we are dealing with a Federal Judge, so we cannot really know how he will approach this issue.  However based on what I have heard reported about the hearing, I would guess he will make a definitive ruling.  I also think the longer this goes on, the more likely he is to be considering ruling against Florida since theoretically any delay causes further harm to Florida.  But like I said, he is a Federal Judge, so he can pretty much do whatever he thinks is correct.

[MrMarc]

1 minute ago, ontheweb said:

One of the perplexing things about the case has been that the cruise lines are not really directly involved.

I think they want to stay out of the fray and start sailing however they can.  Once they restart, they can worry about the details.  Also, the CDC rules MAY give them an out for the Florida and Texas laws regarding asking for proof of vaccination, so they may not want the CDC order overturned.

[ontheweb]

Just now, MrMarc said:

I think they want to stay out of the fray and start sailing however they can.  Once they restart, they can worry about the details.  Also, the CDC rules MAY give them an out for the Florida and Texas laws regarding asking for proof of vaccination, so they may not want the CDC order overturned.

I agree 100%. Florida winning just might make things even more complicated to restart. But of course, they could not say that.

[IntrepidFromDC]

51 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

That does not seem to apply to District Attorneys who are government lawyers.

Some, at least, based on occasional news stories.  And our VP.

[MrMarc]

9 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I agree 100%. Florida winning just might make things even more complicated to restart. But of course, they could not say that.

Wow, I'm not used to having people say they agree with me.

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, Radiioman46 said:

CDC is political driven.

 

Last year I would agree with you.

[firefly333]

1 hour ago, MrMarc said:

I think they want to stay out of the fray and start sailing however they can.  Once they restart, they can worry about the details.  Also, the CDC rules MAY give them an out for the Florida and Texas laws regarding asking for proof of vaccination, so they may not want the CDC order overturned.

I know you know texas law doesnt prevent asking the same way. Unless its politically motivated why keep acting like texas prevents asking. Obviously the cruiselines know better.

 

I dont get the purpose to keep repeating incorrect info about texas. I know you've been corrected many times. Florida and texas law isnt the same. ..just politics to pretend it is.

[TNcruising02]

1 hour ago, Radiioman46 said:

CDC is political driven.

 

Of course it is. Why else would they state that everyone had to wear masks on cruises nearly every waking hour and then change it to only the unvaccinated after the negative reactions?

[BlerkOne]

4 minutes ago, firefly333 said:

I dont get the purpose to keep repeating incorrect info about texas. I know you've been corrected many times. Florida and texas law isnt the same. ..just politics to pretend it is.

Obvious are politics behind both laws, ncluding Texas. When Carnival decided to go ahead with vaccinated cruises in July, Texas was quick move the date up from the end of August.

[jsglow]

1 hour ago, BlerkOne said:

Last year I would agree with you.

Okay Blerk, you bring valuable info to this board but your political bias shows through very brightly.  One has to be quite naive to believe they aren't politically motivated now as well.  NOTHING in the science changed in early May yet they did a complete 180 because that's what the new boss needed politically.  Now to the extent that it opened things up, great.  But it was still politics.

Edited June 12, 2021 by jsglow

[BlerkOne]

2 minutes ago, jsglow said:

Okay Blerk, you bring valuable info to this board but your political bias shows through very brightly.  One has to be quite naive to believe they aren't politically motivated now as well.  NOTHING in the science changed in early May yet they did a complete 180 because that's what the new boss needed politically.  Now to the extent that it opened things up, great.  But it was still politics.

It is absurd to think the CDC is anything but apolitical. Data, as in vaccinations and dropping cases are why things are opening. But vaccinations are not a complete answer. Additional mitigation is still required. 

[MrMarc]

46 minutes ago, firefly333 said:

I know you know texas law doesnt prevent asking the same way. Unless its politically motivated why keep acting like texas prevents asking. Obviously the cruiselines know better.

 

I dont get the purpose to keep repeating incorrect info about texas. I know you've been corrected many times. Florida and texas law isnt the same. ..just politics to pretend it is.

I do not know who you think has been correcting me about Texas,   I have always said that my opinions were just that, and I assumed the Cruise Lines had good lawyers advising them.  As for the laws, while different in structure, they are very similar in form.  Both have exemptions for Federal screening procedures, although the Texas law is a bit broader and the Port of Galveston has specifically stated they think cruise lines can ask for proof of vaccination.  The main difference is in the penalties.  Florida provides for the Health department to impose a fine of up to $5000 (I don't know whether that would be civil or criminal) and Texas provides for the loss of any State funding and the possible withholding or cancelation of any permits to do business, but the pertinent agencies would have to adopt those rules.  I don't know that any agency has done so yet.  These are factual statements about the two laws, so I am not sure what corrections you are talking about.

Edited June 12, 2021 by MrMarc
typo

[MrMarc]

Another complication is that The Port of Galveston does receive State funding, which might or might not complicate the Texas situation.