TSA no longer enforcing US mask mandate
Apr 20, 2022, 5:15 pm
#136
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: USA
Programs: American Airlines (Executive Platinum), Hyatt (Globalist), Hilton (Diamond), IHG (Diamond)
Posts: 2,917
DOJ appealed because the CDC said "an order requiring masking in the transportation corridor remains necessary to protect the public health," but they didn't request a stay?
Who are they trying to fool with this nonsense?
Who are they trying to fool with this nonsense?
Apr 20, 2022, 5:17 pm
#137
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: Hilton Diamond Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 1,180
The progressive base, blue check marks on Twitter, and probably those over in Omni.
Apr 20, 2022, 5:18 pm
#138
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,639
Why is the government even allowed to appeal an unfavorable judgment? When the government (a court) rules against the government, what does that say about the government's case to begin with?
Apr 20, 2022, 5:41 pm
#139
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,313
this whole thing is such a political mess, and I'm loving every minute of it.
Apr 20, 2022, 5:45 pm
#140
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: RIC
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum
Posts: 63
Let the fireworks begin...
CDC asks Justice Department to appeal ruling that lifted travel mask mandate (cnbc.com)
CDC asks Justice Department to appeal ruling that lifted travel mask mandate (cnbc.com)
Apr 20, 2022, 6:33 pm
#141
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: USA
Programs: American Airlines (Executive Platinum), Hyatt (Globalist), Hilton (Diamond), IHG (Diamond)
Posts: 2,917
From the above link:
“CDC believes this is a lawful order, well within CDC’s legal authority to protect public health. CDC continues to recommend that people wear masks in all indoor public transportation settings,” the agency wrote in a statement adding that it will continue to monitor public health conditions to “determine whether such an order remains necessary.”
The new appeal is largely expected to have no immediate effect given that the Justice Department has not yet made an attempt to block Mizelle’s order. The appeal process is slated to unfold over a number of months.
[mod edit]
“CDC believes this is a lawful order, well within CDC’s legal authority to protect public health. CDC continues to recommend that people wear masks in all indoor public transportation settings,” the agency wrote in a statement adding that it will continue to monitor public health conditions to “determine whether such an order remains necessary.”
The new appeal is largely expected to have no immediate effect given that the Justice Department has not yet made an attempt to block Mizelle’s order. The appeal process is slated to unfold over a number of months.
[mod edit]
Last edited by NewbieRunner; Apr 22, 2022 at 2:43 pm Reason: Redacted OMNI comment
Apr 20, 2022, 6:56 pm
#142
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 153
Your points are interesting, and make me curious what the play is here. Maybe it is as simple as the CDC thinks it's necessary, so we'll fight for it. But I always got the sense that they knew it was politically untenable and wanted it gone, but wanted it gone as a matter of executive decision.
This middle ground compromise position doesn’t make sense to me. It just seems like the most likely outcome of this strategy is that they end up with the ability to impose mask mandates struck down completely nationwide, with not even any mask mandate enforcement in the meantime as consolation for their struggle. I suppose they could disagree, and think they have a good chance of success, and thus simply be trying to preserve their authority, but even then - surely they agree they’d have a better chance later when there’s a strong imminent threat?
I have no sense and no information to add as to where this goes next. I’m confused.
Apr 20, 2022, 7:00 pm
#143
Suspended
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 116
It's so amateurish and absurd it's hard to tell which outcome they want. Do they want the mandate to go away, thus no request for a stay, or are they hoping a leftist judge catches the case and issues a stay sua sponte, so Biden can try to deflect blame ("We didn't ask for a stay")?
All that to say, not sure they can fish for a lefty judge in its current state.
Bottom line, very low likelihood the CDC succeeds here.
With a war going on, inflation and gas out of control, massive supply chain issues, and the list goes on, I cannot figure out why joe would spend so much political capital on a complete (essentially) non issue in which 85% of people don’t want it.
It’s extremely odd to me. You’re going to get smoked in November, why not focus on at least one relevant thing that may help lessen the coming election blowout?
Apr 20, 2022, 7:05 pm
#144
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 1,372
Credit where credit is due - your prediction held up better than my prediction. I just can’t understand where they’re going with this or what the logic is. If they had immediately went for a stay and had their partners keep enforcing in the meantime yesterday, that would have made sense. If they had quietly used this as an excuse to let the mask mandate lapse and wait for a better time to fight this battle, that would have made sense.
This middle ground compromise position doesn’t make sense to me. It just seems like the most likely outcome of this strategy is that they end up with the ability to impose mask mandates struck down completely nationwide, with not even any mask mandate enforcement in the meantime as consolation for their struggle. I suppose they could disagree, and think they have a good chance of success, and thus simply be trying to preserve their authority, but even then - surely they agree they’d have a better chance later when there’s a strong imminent threat?
I have no sense and no information to add as to where this goes next. I’m confused.
This middle ground compromise position doesn’t make sense to me. It just seems like the most likely outcome of this strategy is that they end up with the ability to impose mask mandates struck down completely nationwide, with not even any mask mandate enforcement in the meantime as consolation for their struggle. I suppose they could disagree, and think they have a good chance of success, and thus simply be trying to preserve their authority, but even then - surely they agree they’d have a better chance later when there’s a strong imminent threat?
I have no sense and no information to add as to where this goes next. I’m confused.
Apr 20, 2022, 7:34 pm
#145
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,313
From my reading, it goes to the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, which is conservative and if they lose and appeal again, it goes to the Supreme Court (if they take it).
All that to say, not sure they can fish for a lefty judge in its current state.
Bottom line, very low likelihood the CDC succeeds here.
With a war going on, inflation and gas out of control, massive supply chain issues, and the list goes on, I cannot figure out why joe would spend so much political capital on a complete (essentially) non issue in which 85% of people don’t want it.
It’s extremely odd to me. You’re going to get smoked in November, why not focus on at least one relevant thing that may help lessen the coming election blowout?
All that to say, not sure they can fish for a lefty judge in its current state.
Bottom line, very low likelihood the CDC succeeds here.
With a war going on, inflation and gas out of control, massive supply chain issues, and the list goes on, I cannot figure out why joe would spend so much political capital on a complete (essentially) non issue in which 85% of people don’t want it.
It’s extremely odd to me. You’re going to get smoked in November, why not focus on at least one relevant thing that may help lessen the coming election blowout?
Apr 20, 2022, 7:41 pm
#146
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Apr 20, 2022, 7:55 pm
#147
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 1,546
Don’t lump us all together. I’m the progressive base, and this mandate needed to go, and the testing requirement needs to go too. I’m not happy that this is the hill the people I voted for have chosen to die on, when they could be spending whatever political capital they have left on more pressing issues.
Apr 20, 2022, 8:36 pm
#148
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
I'm with you on this, and it really should be a bipartisan issue. LOL Jokes aside, in my view, most Americans just don't care to travel abroad--nothing wrong with this--and the convenience of int'l travelers probably doesn't move the needle for either party. I suspect many of our fellow Americans probably think, "what's the big deal? Just spend your quarantine in a hotel with some room service."
Apr 20, 2022, 8:44 pm
#149
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: PDX, OGG or between the two
Programs: AS 75K
Posts: 2,864
I dunno..... there's some "survey" being thrown around today that says "a majority of Americans" want people to mask up when traveling. I'd sure like to know who they polled because I'm hard-pressed to find 10%. Even most of the VERY pro-mask FT crowd seems to welcome the end (once they were finished bashing the judge in every way possible, of course).
Apr 20, 2022, 8:46 pm
#150
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: California
Posts: 241
I wonder if this will make it easier for me to get a bar seat at airports. When connecting, I usually hit up an Admirals Club in ORD or DFW. But I remember a couple airports (RSW most recently) where I couldn't get a spot at any bar. I suspect that a lot of people spent more time & $ at airport bars than they normally would just because they could remove their mask without harassment. I know I did, although I will still hit up an airport bar in these airports for a drink, but definitely won't stay the entire time if I can head to the gate or browse a shop while being able to breathe freely.