Justice Department appeals ruling lifting transit mask mandate after CDC request

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  one month ago  •  50 comments

By:   Zoe Richards

Justice Department appeals ruling lifting transit mask mandate after CDC request
The Department of Justice has moved to appeal a ruling that struck down the federal mask mandate on planes, trains and transit systems after a request by the Ce

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The Department of Justice has moved to appeal a ruling that struck down the federal mask mandate on planes, trains and transit systems after a request by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC said in a statement Wednesday that "at this time an order requiring masking in the indoor transportation corridor remains necessary for the public health," adding that it has asked the Justice Department to proceed with an appeal.

The Justice Department said that it has filed a notice of appeal "in light of today's assessment by the CDC" in a statement late Wednesday afternoon.

The Justice Department has not asked the appeals court to block the judge's order that lifted the federal mask mandate on transit systems, meaning passengers will be able to continue traveling maskless while the decision is litigated.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle for the Middle District of Florida ruled that the travel mask mandate was unlawful, arguing that the CDC had overstepped its legal authority by imposing the mandate in February 2021.

The mandate, which was rolled out to combat the Covid-19 pandemic, had recently been extended to May 3 before it was struck down.

The Justice Department announced earlier this week that it would appeal the ruling if the CDC decides that masks are still required on public transportation.

"As we have said before, wearing masks is most beneficial in crowded or poorly ventilated locations, such as the transportation corridor," the CDC said Wednesday. "When people wear a well-fitting mask or respirator over their nose and mouth in indoor travel or public transportation settings, they protect themselves, and those around them, including those who are immunocompromised or not yet vaccine-eligible, and help keep travel and public transportation safer for everyone."

Because of the ruling, the White House said the Transportation Security Administration will no longer enforce masks on public transport and in transportation hubs. Several airlines, including United, Delta and American, have since issued statements saying masks are now optional.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters during a news conference Wednesday that the Biden administration is "deferring to the CDC on what they believe is needed at this moment."

The agency extended the mandate "because they felt they needed to take a look at the data, given that we've seen a rise in cases," she said, noting that the Justice Department had signaled it would appeal the judge's decision in an effort to empower the CDC during the public health crisis.

"We want to preserve that authority for the CDC to have in the future," she said.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1  Buzz of the Orient    one month ago

Just wondering how you would feel sitting in the middle seat of an airplane between a couple of strangers who are not wearing masks.  It is well known that a mask is more effective if worn by others in your presence than one worn by yourself for prevention.  I was amused to read in another article that the airplanes' air filtration systems are equally as effective as ones in hospitals - If so, why do all hospital staff wear masks?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2  Sparty On    one month ago

And you just got Fauci’d .... again

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
3  Jeremy Retired in NC    one month ago
White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters during a news conference Wednesday that the Biden administration is "deferring to the CDC on what they believe is needed at this moment."

And since when does the CDC have the authority to implement mandates, policy and rules?  I understood it that they can only make RECOMMENDATIONS and it was up to the Surgeon General to work with DHHS to implement mandates, rules and policy.

It's also odd that the we were subjected to the man child Fauci and not the Surgeon General.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @3    one month ago

Those who complain about having to wear a mask are pussies.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
3.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago

And exactly what does that have to do with the questions I ask or my statement in general?  Or are you just trolling?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
4  Snuffy    one month ago

I don't understand the science here.  So they want to bring back the mask mandates on air planes and public transportation because Covid is still such an urgent issue however Covid is not such an urgent issue at the Southern border where they want to eliminate Title 42.  

I'm trying to understand what science they are following here...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4    one month ago

One has nothing to do with the other.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Expert
4.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @4.1    one month ago

Exactly, the only thing in common is the disease. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
4.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @4.1    one month ago

That doesn't quite fly however.  A mask mandate on public transportation was started because of Covid transmission.  Title 42 was started to restrict entry to this country because of Covid transmission.  They were both enacted for the same reasons so there for the science behind them should have the same consideration.  Unless you are trying to tell me that the science behind the mandate & Title 42 were in fact "political science" rather than medical science...

It's really simple reasoning.  If the risk of Covid transmissions are low enough that we no longer need to turn away illegal immigrants then it should be low enough to remove the mask mandates as well. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.1    one month ago

The hell it doesn't. You do know that the coming insurgency is going to cause even more feral cats to be released

into the general populace of the US right? And no telling what kind of environment they are coming from bringing with them who knows what. maybe even your favorite go to. Tertiary syphilis 

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1.4  Hallux  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.3    one month ago
feral cats

How long before there is a cute slur for Ukrainians?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.4    one month ago

See how some folks view their fellow human beings?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.4    one month ago

Friend of yours?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4.1.2    one month ago

I don't follow your 'simple' reasoning.  Again, save it for someone who is listening to you.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.4    one month ago

Charger made that popular and you see how his fellow humanitarian pals view their fellow human beings.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Hallux @4.1.4    one month ago

Never. And for damned good reasons. When did the bombs start flying in Central and South America? And I guess I have a bit of a twisted sense of "humor" or lack a bleeding heart liberal attitude. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1.10  Hallux  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.6    one month ago

Yes, and a good one at that.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
4.1.11  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.7    one month ago

If you don't "listen" to me (ie, read what I post) then why do you bother to respond?  We don't get a trophy for the most posts in a month, there's no monetary reward for posting so why bother to respond?

If you refuse to explain why you say what you do, then why bother to respond in the first place?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.12  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.10    one month ago

I'm sorry to hear that.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.9    one month ago

Sounds more like a lack of empathy and compassion for your fellow human beings. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4.1.11    one month ago

Why do you bother?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
4.1.15  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.14    one month ago

That's what I asked  you,  why do you bother to respond to me when  you won't explain yourself.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.16  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.13    one month ago

That's what I said. Lack of a liberal bleeding heart attitude. I feel for them. But do it legally. Or, stay and be part of the solution to the problems they are running from. Although the estimates show 5 million fled Ukraine, a large portion of the populace stayed..........most fighting for their, and their fellow countrymens lives.

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1.17  Hallux  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.12    one month ago

There are more reasons under the sun to befriend someone than there are to make an enemy of them. Jim would jump in front of a bus to save his children and then jump in front of it again to save mine; I would do the same for him.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.18  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4.1.15    one month ago

Why do you?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.19  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.17    one month ago

I don't consider anyone an enemy here.  

Sorry for being flip with you.  You have nothing to do with my problem with him.  

I would do the same for my friends and family also.  

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Expert
4.1.20  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.7    one month ago

I don't follow your 'simple' reasoning. 

Congrats on being big enough to admit it.

Again, save it for someone who is listening to you.

Exactly, someone commenting as frequently as you doesn't have time to also think about others have said.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.21  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1.20    one month ago

Okey dokey

 
 
 
Snuffy
Senior Guide
4.1.22  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.18    one month ago

Because I always hold out hope and want people to be better, because I want to expand my knowledge and understanding of issues and cannot do that if I restrict myself to only one side of things.  I believe that one cannot grow in this life if all they experience is life in their own echo chamber.

But if all you can do is argue without presenting any reasoning behind  your decisions or just sit there and say "nah uh" then you're right, why do I try.  It's a waste of time to hope that you will actually hold a conversation that is not firmly in your belief system.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.23  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4.1.22    one month ago

That's nice but I get tired of going around and around and around and around with you on the same damned thing.  That's a waste of time to me.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
4.1.24  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.13    one month ago

What is your problem with Ukrainian refugees?

Do you have  a lack of empathy and compassion for your fellow human beings?

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1.25  Hallux  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1.20    one month ago

If you believe that someone has painted themselves into a corner, the wise move is to let the paint dry before trying to save them. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.26  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.23    one month ago
That's nice but I get tired of going around and around and around and around with you on the same damned thing.  That's a waste of time to me.

Inquiring minds want to know. Then why the hell do you do it? Why respond at all? Seems a bit self defeating.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.27  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.26    one month ago

Nope.  You just want to troll.  Like on my article about trumpturd - you just trolled it because that's what you do.

One comment I made to you and we are forever at odds and that is fine with me.  

Who do you think you're fooling?  Maybe your pals here but not me.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.28  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @4.1.25    one month ago

He just likes to follow certain folks around and tease them.  Have I painted myself into a corner?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.29  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.13    one month ago
Sounds more like a lack of empathy and compassion for your fellow human beings. 

Lol ... a very hypocritical comment considering the source.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Expert
4.1.30  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Hallux @4.1.25    one month ago

Good advice, thanks Hallux.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.31  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.27    one month ago

Not trying to fool anyone and you are a bit too full of yourself at times. Like now. Sucks when someone uses your own tactics against you doesn't it. I am really not trying to it is just that some of the comments you make spark opposite views. THAT is it. It is not about you per se. It is more about the comments and your way of thinking. Period. Understand now?

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1.32  Hallux  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.28    one month ago
He just likes to follow certain folks around and tease them.

We all do, it's a form of masturbation by other means.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.33  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.31    one month ago

You're not fooling me.  I don't use your tactics.  That's all you.  

I don't comprehend you and I don't want to.

Toodles.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
4.1.34  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.33    one month ago

You really should replace your mirror as it seems a bit hazy.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.35  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.34    one month ago

Right back at ya jj

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
5  magicschoolbusdropout    one month ago

"THE" President did tell us just a day or two ago :

"It is up to individuals whether they wear a mask or not."

Psaki probably went all "Teary eyed" over that one too. 

But, She cleared up Brandons "CLEAR Statement" real quick : 

"To be clear, we are recommending everyone wear masks on planes."

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
6  Nerm_L    one month ago

Well, as the article explains, the DOJ appeal isn't about masks, science, or the pandemic.  The Florida district court ruling was that the CDC overstepped its legal authority in February, 2021.  The appeal is only about the CDC retaining the unilateral power to impose regulations onto the country without Congressional input.

The central issue is a conflict between the authority of the President, Congress, and independent agencies of the government.  Notice that people's rights aren't part of the discussion.

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
6.1  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one month ago
The central issue is a conflict between the authority of the President, Congress, and independent agencies of the government.

That's what I understood the Federal Judge's ruling was all about from the beginning.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
6.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @6.1    one month ago
That's what I understood the Federal Judge's ruling was all about from the beginning.

Yes,  But arguments about masks, science, or the pandemic are irrelevant to the DOJ appeal.  In this case, the CDC is using the pandemic to protect its authority as an independent agency of the government.  

So, were the CDC mandates issued in February, 2021, about public health & safety or about exercising unilateral governmental authority?

The central question has nothing to do with whether or not masks are effective.

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
6.1.2  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Nerm_L @6.1.1    one month ago
So, were the CDC mandates issued in February, 2021, about public health & safety or about exercising unilateral governmental authority?

I'll take the latter for 500 Nerm .

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
7  evilgenius    one month ago

42 CFR § 70.5 - Requirements relating to travelers under a Federal order of isolation, quarantine, or conditional release.

(c)Whenever a conveyance operating in interstate traffic transports an individual under a Federal order or travel permit, the Director may require that the operator of the conveyance submit the conveyance to inspection, sanitary measures, and other measures, as the Director deems necessary to prevent the possible spread of communicable disease.

42 U.S. Code § 264 - Regulations to control communicable diseases

The Surgeon General , with the approval of the Secretary, is authorized to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession.

There is a lot more at the links, but this the law both the Trump and Biden admins have used for Order 42 and federal travel mandates. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8  devangelical    one month ago

cool, a window of opportunity for the new variant. the anti-vaxer and Q-nut bonus round...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
9  Sean Treacy    one month ago

The Biden admin doesn’t really want this overturned Anytime soon.if they they did, they’d have asked for a stay of the judges order.  

instead, they can litigate away while telling the mandatory mask people that they are fighting for them, even if they are in no hurry to win because that would mean masks are back.

it’s always politics, not science, with the Biden admin. 

 
 

Who is online





MonsterMash


31 visitors