Posted on 04/18/2022 10:51:22 AM PDT by Ben Dover
(CNN)A federal judge in Florida struck down on Monday the Biden administration's mask mandate for airplanes and other public transport methods.
US District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle said the mandate was unlawful because it exceeded the statutory authority of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and because its implementation violated administrative law.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
The only statistics I want to see on COVID are how many politicians and public health officials are hanged for putting mask mandates in place and to tar and feather any civilians who supported such idiocy.
...Indeed...!!!! will be flying in just a few days... if this strike-down holds, we will not be required to wear those frikki’n face diapers....hope and pray this will be the case....!!!!
There are other news outlets reporting this. Why are you directing us to CNN?
A. The Mask Mandate Excceds the CDC's Authority under the Public Health Services Act Because "[a]dministrative agencies are creatures of statute," they "possess only the authority that Congress has provided." Natl Fed'n of lndep. Bus. v. Dep't of Lab., 142 S. Ct.661, 665 (2022) (per curiam). In issuing the Mask Mandate that requires most "persons to wear masks over the mouth and nose when traveling on any conveyance... into or within the United States," 86 Fed. Reg. at 8026, the Director of the CDC relied on a section of the Public Health Services Act of 1944 (PHSA) for authority, see 42 U.S.C. 264(a); see also 42 C.F.R. 70.2 (delegating regulatory authority under this statute to the CDC). That provision empowers him to promulgate regulations aimed at "identifying, isolating, and destroying diseases, Ala. Ass'n of Realtors v. Dep't of Health & Hum....
Other sections of the PHSA also provide the CDC with a limited power to apprehend, detain, examine, or provide conditions for the release of individuals "coming into a State or possession from a foreign country or traveling between States but only when the CDC reasonably believe|s)" that the person is "infected with a communicable disease" and is a "probable source of infection" to others. $ 264(6H(A). In that latter situation, the CDC may detain the individual "if upon examination he is "found to be infected. $ 264(d)(1). Since Congress enacted it in 1944, the PHSA has "generally been limited to quarantining infected individuals and prohibiting the import or sale of animals known to transmit disease." Ala. Ass'n of Realtors, 141 S. Ct. at 2487. It "has been rarely invoked." Id. At least until recently. Within the past two years, the CDC has found within $ 264(a) the power to shut down the eruise ship industry, stop landlords from evicting tenants who have not paid their rent, and require that persons using public conveyances wear masks. Courts have concluded that the first two of these measures exceeded the CDCs statutory authority under $ 264. See id. at 2488-89 (explaining that the eviction moratorium likely exceeded the scope of $ 264(a); Florida v. Becerra, 544 F. Supp. 3d 1241, 1272 (M.D. Fla. 2021) (Merryday, J) (reasoning that the CDC's conditional sail order exceeded the CDC's statutory authority under $ 264(a). No court has yet ruled on the legality of the third. At first blush, it appears more closely reated to the powers granted in $ 264(a) than 10 Case 8:21-cv-01693-KKM-AEP Document 53 Filed 04/18/22 Page 11 of 59 PagelD 902 either the sail order or the eviction moratorium. But after rigorous statutory analysis, the Court concludes that $ 264(a) does not authorize the CDC to issue the Mask Mandate. - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21636492-mask-mandate-order
...I may be mistaken but I think I recall the airline flight attendants’ union(s) was backing these mask mandates...for what reason(s) is/are unknown, but I think I am correct....
I’m sure the mouth breathers at the TSA will be understanding...
P.S. Make sure to thank GWB for this.
The only problem is that an airline can require it if it wishes to do so. If I need to fly somewhere, will be looking for airlines that do not require the mask.
BTW, the air in some (most?) airplanes is probably cleaner than what we have in our homes. For one, Southwest uses HEPA air filters, and the air is replaced every two minutes.
Most large unions are corrupted by the left just like the teachers union.
You are correct. They still want it because their leftist masters cannot admit that masks provide no protection to their members.
However, the airline CEO’s are looking at the bottom line (profit) and you must admit that the reasoning of the CDC/TSA is very flawed when it comes to masking.
This make Joe happy too.
They are attempting to destroy commercial flights.
Not a leap when you figure they are trying to destroy gas and oil. Of course they will be exempt from any and all green mandates.
If I saw Fauci on the street and punched him out, couldn’t I claim he threw the first several punches???
All the airline CEOs are opposed to mask mandates, so I doubt you will need a copy of the order unless the Circuit Court of Appeals reverses before you leave.
“There are other news outlets reporting this. Why are you directing us to CNN?”
Because that is where I found this and if the Mods want to pull this because it’s CNN they can go for it. I’m more interested with the info than where I found it.
My Mother died this morning...I’m not in the mood for your snarky remarks.
It may take time for this to filter into the market (not saying FREE MARKET, we know that now.)
Individual airlines will likely keep the mandate in order to maintain business as there are still a lot of demoncraps in the country who won't fly without them.
Although personal choice should have always been the way to go. [Profanity Edited] those commies.
That and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. It seemed like a good idea on paper to bring all intel agencies and fed law enforcement together to share intel under one umbrella. How'd that work out?
I’m sorry for your loss. May your Mom rest in peace.
ORDER
Page 2: "The Court concludes that the Mask Mandate exceeds the CDC’s statutory authority and violates the procedures required for agency rulemaking under the APA. Accordingly, the Court vacates the Mandate and remands it to the CDC.
Unfortunately it is remanded back to CDC. So how will they "fix" their mandate to make it palatable to the judge?
The ruling is FULL of good information on how CDC failed to act properly and consistently.
Page 51: In sum, irrespective of whether the CDC made a good or accurate decision, it needed to explain why it acted as it did. Since the CDC did not explain its decision to compromise the effectiveness of its Mandate by including exceptions or its decision to limit those exceptions, the Court cannot conclude that the CDC “articulated a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choices made.” And so, the decision is arbitrary and capricious and due to be “set aside” and remanded to the agency.This is great news that a judge is knocking down "arbitrary and capricious" government. Let's hope they apply this same reasoning to immigration law, energy policy, and healthcare which are all thoroughly riddled with arbitrary and capricious decisions by bureaucrats.IV. CONCLUSION (p 58)
“It is indisputable that the public has a strong interest in combating the spread of [COVID-19].” In pursuit of that end, the CDC issued the Mask Mandate. But the Mandate exceeded the CDC’s statutory authority, improperly invoked the good cause exception to notice and comment rulemaking, and failed to adequately explain its decisions. Because “our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully even in pursuit of desirable ends,” the Court declares unlawful and vacates the Mask Mandate. Accordingly, the following is ORDERED:
1. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary judgment is GRANTED on Counts I, II, and III. Defendants' Motion for Summary judgment is DENIED.
2. The Court DECLARES UNLAWFUL and VACATES the Mask Mandate, remanding it to the CDC for further pr ocee dings consistent with this order.
Common sense and rule of law? knock me over with a feather.
My sincere condolences and empathy, FRiend.
LOL...I like your ideas! LOL.
Let me get back to you on how it went.
Bttt.
5.56mm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.