• Home
  • Reviews
    • Flight Reviews
    • Hotel Reviews
    • Lounge Reviews
    • Trip Reports
  • About
    • Press
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • Award Expert
Live and Let's Fly
  • Home
  • Reviews
    • Flight Reviews
    • Hotel Reviews
    • Lounge Reviews
    • Trip Reports
  • About
    • Press
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • Award Expert
Home » News » Biden’s Federal Mask Mandate Changes Little In Travel
News

Biden’s Federal Mask Mandate Changes Little In Travel

Kyle Stewart Posted onJanuary 31, 2021September 12, 2021 8 Comments
My dear readers, some links on this site pay us referral fees for sending business and sales. We value your time and money and will not waste it. For our complete advertising policy, click here. The content on this page is not provided by any companies mentioned, and has not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by these entities. Opinions expressed here are the author's alone.

President Biden has issued 42 executive orders since taking office, and among them one that mandates wearing masks in federal facilities, but that changes little in travel. 


If you are considering booking travel or signing up for a new credit card please click here. Both support LiveAndLetsFly.com.


If you haven’t followed us on Facebook or Instagram, add us today.

Executive Order

President Joe Biden set the tone of his administration by signing a record-setting number of executive orders following his inauguration. Several were issued regarding the requirement of wearing face coverings inside of federal facilities, the limit of the president’s executive power. CNN provided a write-up of all the executive orders the president issued.

Executive Order on Promoting COVID-19 Safety in Domestic and International Travel. 

Requires mask-wearing in airports and on certain modes of transportation, including many trains, airplanes, maritime vessels and intercity buses. International travelers must provide proof of negative Covid-19 tests prior to coming to the US. – CNN

Here is a list of those modes of transportation and locations:

(i)    airports;

(ii)   commercial aircraft;

(iii)  trains;

(iv)   public maritime vessels, including ferries;

(v)    intercity bus services; and

(vi)   all forms of public transportation as defined in section 5302 of title 49, United States Code.

President Biden’s first Executive Order (not the above) was the “100 Days Mask Challenge” mandating masks to be worn on federal land and buildings. However, there is no language regarding the length of the specific travel order. The two overlap in airports, already covered in the first order.

mask mandate travel

Why It Changes Little

Prior to the changing of the guard in Washington, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued an order that required all international arrivals into any US port of entry to supply a negative COVID-19 test result. The president’s executive action calling for the same was a week after the CDC guideline was announced.

Likewise, virtually every (if not every) airport in the country already required masks. Many airlines acted faster than the CDC and state governments in requiring masks to be worn. Some have enforced masks with dubious results, passenger compliance has had strong consequences.

As a local or state effort, transportation hubs like subway stations had already ordered mask mandates if not further, more stringent policies based on their local requirements. Those municipalities had a responsibility for protecting the public health interests regardless of whether the White House issued an order signed by President Trump or Biden.

In issuing this particular executive order for a mask mandate, travel changes little. Some could argue that the mandate was important to reset the country’s focus and affect change for which he had the power to affect. But in practical terms, the order maintained what had already been implemented by both the private sector and public facilities.

It could be suggested that by issuing the mandate, federal facilities were given more latitude to enforce face-covering policy in the event it was necessary. However, even private sector businesses like airlines have acted with impunity with regard to their own policies. Some have banned those who fail to comply, banning them for the short term or even for life.

I couldn’t find a single example for which this executive action delivered a material change which begs the question: Outside of posterity, was this order effective in changing anything?

Conclusion

Matthew called the mask mandate “regress” not progress, but I disagree. He finds that there will be more room to move in the new rules than the old, while I find that the mandate does little.

These policies were already in place at the local level, everywhere. There wasn’t a courthouse in the country, federal, state, or county for which a person could enter bare-faced prior to the order – if they were open at all. I can understand the need to establish precedence, but the first order the president signed once in office achieved that goal.

What do you think? Was it necessary from a perspective of setting the tone the president wanted? Is there a material change you saw from the order that I missed? 

Get Daily Updates

Join our mailing list for a daily summary of posts! We never sell your info.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Previous Article 5 Must-Try Restaurants in Fort Myers, Florida
Next Article New Travel Show Concept Needs Support

About Author

Kyle Stewart

Kyle is a freelance travel writer with contributions to Time, the Washington Post, MSNBC, Yahoo!, Reuters, Huffington Post, MapHappy, Live And Lets Fly and many other media outlets. He is also co-founder of Scottandthomas.com, a travel agency that delivers "Travel Personalized." He focuses on using miles and points to provide a premium experience for his wife and daughter. Email: sherpa@thetripsherpa.com

Follow us on FacebookFollow us on Twitter

Related Posts

  • Army Helicopter Flights DCA

    Army Grounds Helicopter Flights Near DCA After Another Close Call

    May 7, 2025
  • TLV Rocket Attack

    Delta and United Suspend Tel Aviv Flights After Houthi Rocket Strike Near Airport

    May 5, 2025
  • Alcatraz Trump

    Last Chance To Visit Alcatraz?

    May 5, 2025

8 Comments

  1. Debit Reply
    January 31, 2021 at 10:51 am

    President biden is undoing the damage the orangutan terrorists did to our country.

    • Debit Reply
      January 31, 2021 at 11:17 am

      https://english.elpais.com/americas/2021-01-29/study-finds-that-brazils-jair-bolsonaro-carried-out-an-institutional-strategy-to-spread-the-coronavirus.html

      I bet trump administration followed the same since they were relying on herd immunity. The question to ask is should these terrorists be tortured in Guantanamo to get the details of their terrorist activities or should they have a normal criminal trial in a court of law.

  2. Stuart Reply
    January 31, 2021 at 11:48 am

    It’s called optics and a unified message. It’s what was lacking for the past year. It may do nothing more as you say, but it sends a clear message that the Federal Government is taking this seriously and unifying with a nationwide strategy. This, rather than ad-hoc and each state on their own with conflicting messages, confusion, and a President who believed that it was just a flu, easily beaten, and all fake news.

    • Kyle Stewart Reply
      January 31, 2021 at 1:42 pm

      That’s kind of the point. Masks on federal land wasn’t an issue but for his “unified” message, the 100 mask challenge was his very first order and it cemented that mandate. So doing it again adds nothing literally, and from a messaging standpoint, doesn’t materially change anything either.

  3. Pete Reply
    January 31, 2021 at 12:24 pm

    I’m surprised that on a blog where a majority of posts come from a lawyer, it’s considered ok for federal policy to not exist because since in practice, “everyone is doing it anyway.”
    So when someone inevitably challenges it down the road, the government should say sure there was no mandate because it was “understood”?

    • Kyle Stewart Reply
      January 31, 2021 at 1:37 pm

      @Pete: I see no reason to legislate something that’s already being done. Additionally, all of those areas are already covered in his first executive order, doing it again adds nothing. If you didn’t need it the first time (because facilities were already in compliance) but do an order anyway, then a second order I guess just to make a point, why not do three, or four, or five?

      • Mitch Cumstein Reply
        February 1, 2021 at 7:50 am

        For the same reason that wearing two masks is better than one. And three masks is better than two.

  4. JL Reply
    February 2, 2021 at 9:36 am

    I am confused…I don’t see the point of this post.
    Are you saying Biden should have done something differently?

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Search

Hot Deals for May

Note: Please see my Advertiser Disclosure

Capital One Venture X Business Card
Earn 150,000 Miles Sign Up Bonus
Chase Sapphire Preferred® Card
Earn 100,000 Points
Capital One Venture X Rewards Credit Card
Capital One Venture X Rewards Credit Card
Earn 75,000 Miles!
Capital One Venture Rewards Credit Card
Capital One Venture Rewards Credit Card
Earn 75,000 Miles
Chase Ink Business Unlimited® Credit Card
Earn $750 Cash Back
The Business Platinum Card® from American Express
The Business Platinum Card® from American Express
Earn 120,000 Membership Reward® Points

Recent Posts

  • VE Day
    The World They Died To Build: VE Day 80 Years Later May 8, 2025
  • a plate of food on a table
    American Airlines First Class Sliders Were Too Popular For Their Own Good May 8, 2025
  • American Airlines 787-9 Flagship Routes
    American Airlines Rolls Out Flagship Business Suites On 787-9: Here’s Where To Find Them May 7, 2025
  • Scott Kirby Newark Airport Slot Controls
    United Airlines CEO Says Newark Airport Is Safe—But There’s Just One Problem May 7, 2025

Categories

Popular Posts

  • a room with a table and benches
    Where To Smoke At Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport (CDG) April 26, 2025
  • United Airlines Polaris Lounge Chicago Review
    Review: United Polaris Lounge Chicago (ORD) May 1, 2025
  • United Airlines Refresh Polaris Lounge Chicago
    First Look: United Airlines Reopens Renovated Polaris Lounge In Chicago (ORD) April 29, 2025
  • a hand holding a blue card
    Chase Sapphire Preferred 100K Bonus Offer Ending Soon May 2, 2025

Archives

May 2025
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Apr    

As seen on:

facebook twitter instagram rss
Privacy Policy © Live and Let's Fly All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Live and Let's Fly with appropriate and specific directions to the original content.