WASHINGTON — More transit agencies determined or clarified their stance on Tuesday in the wake of a Monday court ruling striking down a federal requirement for mask use on public transportation, with most — including some that initially planned to retain a mask requirement — dropping the mandate.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration said Tuesday it will appeal a ruling by a Florida judge ending a mask mandate for public transportation, but only if the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention feels the requirement is still necessary.
Transit agencies dropping their mask requirement on Tuesday include commuter operator Metra and the Chicago Transit Authority, which initially said they would retain the rule [see “Federal judge strikes down transportation mask mandate,” Trains News Wire, April 19, 2022]. They changed course after Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker amended the state’s mandate to make mask use optional, WLS-TV reports.
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority announced a similar reversal, the New York Times reports, while the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority dropped its mask requirement even though the city of Philadelphia restored a mask mandate for indoor public spaces last week.
Transit users in the San Francisco Bay area faced mixed messages. The website SFBay.ca reports Bay Area Rapid Transit officials said Tuesday they were conferring with other transit agencies and had not yet determined their mask policy, while the San Francisco Municipal Transit agency, which oversees Muni service, said its mask rule remains in place while it awaits more clarity on Monday’s ruling. Commuter operator Caltrain also said its mask rule remained in place while it reviewed the ruling.
The New York Times reports the administration’s indication of a possible appeal came after it weighed its options, which include the possibility that a loss on appeal could set a lasting precedent hampering further action by the CDC. Its decision to appeal will hinge on the CDC’s decision on the continuing need for the mandate.
If you want to wear one, do so. Do not put your fear on others.
It’s not fear, it’s a scientific fact…if you choose to ignore science and infectious disease experts(not necessarily Fauci, but the 100’s of others), then I can’t help you there, that’s your choice.
Not sure if it’s a majority. There are lots of people who now feel less safe, especially some traveling with young, vaccinated children, or with them at home.
Also those of us with less than optimum immune system are wary.
I’ve done a number of Amtrak trips and will feel less secure without the mask mandate, though I’m not a fan of wearing one for long periods.
As you know, those that are affected more by infectious disease(such as yourself) will take extra precaution in order to remain healthy. All this means is that for you to protect yourself(which is essentially what the mask is for) you’ll have to wear one whenever you deem it in your best interest, regardless of what everyone around you is doing, as it should be.
On legal grounds the Easter Bunny could probably win a reversal or a stay. On political grounds given the mood of the vast majority of Americans, the Easter Bunny will become rabbit stew if the mask requirement is reinstated..
Unless there is a reversal or a stay in next few days, I’m to take my first train ride (Amtrak and Metra) since the mask requirement began.
Are you prepared to wear a mask on Amtrak…last I checked(yesterday) they kept their mask requirement in place. Also, not necessarily legal ground, but more like semantics in this case…cherry picking specific definitions of words(that have multiple definitions depending on CONTEXT). Everyone(especially Trump appointed judges) appear to forget you have to understand the CONTEXT in which certain word are used before you can discern what definition to use.
Gerald —- We pretty much said the same thing, you post and my post. While I’m sure that somewhere in the 69-page opinion the judge made some valid points, splitting hairs over the meaning of words (as you say) doesn’t look good to you or to an appellate judge. It looks like she started with the verdict and worked her way back to the evidence. I’m glad for the verdict as I’m a 100% anti-masker on several different grounds, but if I were a lawyer I could easily find ground for appeal.
My guess is the appellate court will just let it rest. The Easter Bunny Administration made a big mistake with its latest 2-week extension of the mask rule because the public isn’t that stupid. Pro-mask or anti-mask, people know that diseases don’t come in two-week tranches.