Originally Posted by
Xrayman
no shoes, no shirt, no service has been well litigated and deemed acceptable based upon safety and social etiquette.
no indoor smoking or within 20 feet of a door for federal buildings has also been accepted as norm based upon primarily health and safety. This occurred easily after tobacco Corp accepted scientific data that smoking and second hand smoke could “potentially “ be associated with cancer risk.
Mask “mandate” if needed to be litigated would be likely on par, but again scientific data must be acknowledged and verified then accepted. Some in the community still believe the earth is flat and that the moon landings were staged. We need not wait for 100% to accept because 100% requirement is a false doomed to fail barrier.
no shoes , no shirt, no mask, no fly, no exceptions.
This.
Remember that masks are required by air carriers, not by CDC/DOT rule. As many hotels are finding, tough measures are a marketing plus. Most passengers want everyone to wear masks and it is likely an economic loss to a carrier which does not require masks. I am certain that as the number of people "banned" increases, the marketing analytics people are looking at who those people are and I am willing to bet that the majority are folks the carriers are just fine losing as customers.