Masks now required even in private room with door closed.

[pennyk]

BTW AU'ers are mentioned in the article below:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/trav...ships-through-rail-travel-20181024-story.html

All but one of the individuals mentioned in the article are AU members.

 

[Exvalley]

The executive order does not explicitly mention an exception for eating/drinking.

I'm not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that, because the order does not specifically exempt mask wearing while eating and drinking, Amtrak should interpret the order as allowing masks to be off while in a sleeper car? That seems to be quite a stretch.

 

[flitcraft]

As any lawyer can tell you, executive orders are written at a higher level of generality than statutes or administrative regulations are. This is one reason why, all things being equal, statutes and administrative regulations are a better way to regulate than executive orders are. All of them require interpretation as to scope and meaning, of course, but executive orders require the highest degree of construal.

That said, the real question is how the conduction and attendants on your train will interpret the rules. That a court would disagree won't matter if you get let out at the next station.

 

[me_little_me]

The executive order does not explicitly mention an exception for eating/drinking.

I don't make an exception either. Sure, food does taste a little "clothy" and I often find that after eating, I can't find my mask, but there's no price high enough to keep me from being safe.

I have found that by putting a little salt on my mask, my food tastes a little better.

 

[Mailliw]

Enforcement is impossible if you're in your compartment with curtains drawn. Just keep a mask ready in case they knock. I doubt Amtrak is going to remove the curtains (especially in VI roomettes) and and have SCAs monitor passengers.

 

[jis]

It is always a good policy to ask the one who is going to do the local enforcement what his/her intentions are, and follow those. Biden won’t be on the train to enforce anything

 

[Cal]

BTW AU'ers are mentioned in the article below:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/trav...ships-through-rail-travel-20181024-story.html

This was made in 1997... by a ten year old... wow. And by a now-airline executive, I personally wouldn't have guessed it.

That is just awesome.

And I won't lie, I'd probablyyy be one of the more timid folk.

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

Until these ridiculous muzzle mask restrictions are listed my railroad and airline of choice remain Enterprise.

 

[Chris I]

Until these ridiculous muzzle mask restrictions are listed my railroad and airline of choice remain Enterprise.

If you can't be an adult about it, it's probably for everyone's benefit that you don't share indoor spaces with others.

 

[Pat Harper]

The new law does not have an exemption for private Amtrak rooms, so Amtrak can no longer explicitly say that you can remove your mask inside a private room.

What new law? There is no law requiring mask wearing on public transportation, only a Presidential executive order which is not a law because Congress never voted on it. How are they going to enforce it? Does the order spell out the consequences for not complying with it?

 

[20th Century Rider]

If you can't be an adult about it, it's probably for everyone's benefit that you don't share indoor spaces with others.

The need to wear masks is supported by science, medical experts, and those of us who want to live!

 

[crescent-zephyr]

What new law? There is no law requiring mask wearing on public transportation, only a Presidential executive order which is not a law because Congress never voted on it. How are they going to enforce it? Does the order spell out the consequences for not complying with it?

It was already an Amtrak rule that you had to wear a mask when riding the train. Amtrak Conductors will typically remove passengers who do not follow Amtrak rules. With or without a warning depending on the mood of the conductor lol.

 

[20th Century Rider]

What new law? There is no law requiring mask wearing on public transportation, only a Presidential executive order which is not a law because Congress never voted on it. How are they going to enforce it? Does the order spell out the consequences for not complying with it?

To anyone not wearing a mask in my presence... I want to avoid you like the plague...

Because you are the plague!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

What new law? There is no law requiring mask wearing on public transportation, only a Presidential executive order which is not a law because Congress never voted on it. How are they going to enforce it? Does the order spell out the consequences for not complying with it?

They'll enforce it the same way they would any other rule or regulation. Executive orders carry the force of law unless they are reversed, invalidated, or defunded. The order itself is a broad instruction to relevant agencies who are in charge of more specific rules and compliance standards. Passengers who refuse to comply may be kicked off/out, potentially forfeiting their ticket(s), and/or inviting a civil fine or other penalty. Criminal prosecution is unlikely unless the subject becomes aggressive or belligerent and once you succumb to "sovereign citizen" logic anything is possible.

 

[Bob Dylan]

They'll enforce it the same way they would any other rule or regulation. Executive orders carry the force of law unless they are reversed, invalidated, or defunded. The order itself is a broad instruction to relevant agencies who are in charge of more specific rules and compliance standards. Passengers who refuse to comply may be kicked off/out, potentially forfeiting their ticket(s), and/or inviting a civil fine or other penalty. Criminal prosecution is unlikely unless the subject becomes aggressive or belligerent and once you succumb to "sovereign citizen" logic anything is possible.

Hopefully Amtrak will follow some of the Airlines example and put Anti- Maskers and Morons who refuse to follow the Guidelines on a "DO NOT RIDE" List!

 

[AFS1970]

I am certainly no political scientist but in one article that was criticizing behavior right after this EO was signed, I learned something interesting. The EO doesn't actually mandate masks, despite what the media has portrayed it as. It directs the agencies within the executive branch to develop their own mask mandates. It may list some specific points, but each mandate may end up being slightly different. So in the case of Amtrak, I would guess that this is done wither by DOT or by Amtrak. As for enforcement, I am not sure but would think that any departmental mask rule would fall in the same category as any other internal regulation or other administrative rule.

 

[Cal]

Hopefully Amtrak will follow some of the Airlines example and put Anti- Maskers and Morons who refuse to follow the Guidelines on a "DO NOT RIDE" List!

That'd be great.

 

[Exvalley]

I am certainly no political scientist but in one article that was criticizing behavior right after this EO was signed, I learned something interesting. The EO doesn't actually mandate masks, despite what the media has portrayed it as. It directs the agencies within the executive branch to develop their own mask mandates. It may list some specific points, but each mandate may end up being slightly different. So in the case of Amtrak, I would guess that this is done wither by DOT or by Amtrak. As for enforcement, I am not sure but would think that any departmental mask rule would fall in the same category as any other internal regulation or other administrative rule.

Yes and no. The Executive Order does direct certain agencies to make rules, but it also limits what they can and cannot do.

The Executive Order specifically says: [The agencies] shall immediately take action, to the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to require masks to be worn in compliance with CDC guidelines in or on [trains].

The exceptions to this are extremely limited and are spelled out in the Executive Order. Here is the language in the Executive Order on exceptions:
Exceptions. The heads of agencies may make categorical or case-by-case exceptions to policies developed under this section, consistent with applicable law, to the extent that doing so is necessary or required by law. If the heads of agencies do make exceptions, they shall require alternative and appropriate safeguards, and shall document all exceptions in writing.

I guess it boils down to what "to the extent appropriate" means. But if you are a bureaucrat or political appointee who knows that Biden's election platform involved an appeal to mask wearing, are you really going to want to stick your neck out and argue against mask wearing?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Hopefully Amtrak will follow some of the Airlines example and put Anti- Maskers and Morons who refuse to follow the Guidelines on a "DO NOT RIDE" List!

Amtrak has already requested access to the official No Fly List and in response to the most recent insurrection event I would expect this change to be in planning if not active progress with a more inclusive No Travel List on the way.

 

[Exvalley]

Amtrak has already requested access to the official No Fly List and in response to the most recent insurrection event I would expect this change to be in planning if not active progress with a more inclusive No Travel List on the way.

My understanding is that nobody who participated in storming the Capitol on 1/6 has been put on the federal "do not fly list." Whether or not they are ultimately put on the list remains to be seen.

Regardless, until and unless Amtrak is given access to the TSA list, Amtrak is free to maintain their own list. I suspect, though, that there are some additional due process considerations since the Supreme Court has ruled that Amtrak is a government entity.

 

[jis]

I guess it boils down to what "to the extent appropriate" means. But if you are a bureaucrat or political appointee who knows that Biden's election platform involved an appeal to mask wearing, are you really going to want to stick your neck out and argue against mask wearing?

The most important characteristic of a good rule is that it clearly serves the purpose of the intent of the rule and is reasonably enforceable within the law. Patently unenforceable regulations are detrimental to people actually following regulations, a good bureaucrat would indeed state what the issue is, say in case of a Sleeper Room, and stick his neck out to do that to get the correct enforceable regulation in place so that people would take them seriously instead of laughing at them. Even Biden does not intend to have everyone wear their masks to bed in a private room. At least I do not believe he is that crazy.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

My understanding is that nobody who participated in storming the Capitol on 1/6 has been put on the federal "do not fly list." Whether or not they are ultimately put on the list remains to be seen. Amtrak is certainly free to maintain their own list, however.

Because the No Fly List is opaque it's impossible to know who is on it or when/why they were added. Almost any private business is allowed to create a list of customers they refuse to serve in the future. The reason I bring it up is that Amtrak made the connection in their appeal for more access.

 

[LookingGlassTie]

Until these ridiculous muzzle mask restrictions are listed my railroad and airline of choice remain Enterprise.

Even though I currently wear masks only when/where I'm required to do so, I'm a little more willing to wear one on an Amtrak train, given that I'm in close(r) quarters with other people. I'm not bothered by that personally; I just understand the rationale behind Amtrak's policy.

Of course, my next (planned) Amtrak trip will (or should) be in February 2022. I don't know if Amtrak will still require masks then.

Just as long as I'm not required to wear a mask while riding in a friend's or family member's private vehicle.................

 

[Exvalley]

Because the No Fly List is opaque it's impossible to know who is on it or when/why they were added. Almost any private business is allowed to create a list of customers they refuse to serve in the future. The reason I bring it up is that Amtrak made the connection in their appeal for more access.

The Supreme Court has ruled that Amtrak is a government entity, so there are due process considerations that do not apply to private companies.

And before you argue that there are minimal due process rights for the TSA do not fly list, remember that this list was a creation of The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001. An Amtrak private list would not be. In other words, TSA is able to do what they do in large part because they have special statutory authority that Amtrak lacks.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Even though I currently wear masks only when/where I'm required to do so, I'm a little more willing to wear one on an Amtrak train, given that I'm in close(r) quarters with other people. I'm not bothered by that personally; I just understand the rationale behind Amtrak's policy.

Of course, my next (planned) Amtrak trip will (or should) be in February 2022. I don't know if Amtrak will still require masks then.

Just as long as I'm not required to wear a mask while riding in a friend's or family member's private vehicle.................

What if the other person ( or persons) in the Car is Positive for COVID????