The Mask Mandate Just Went From Political to Political-on-Steroids

UPDATE: This column has been updated to reflect the Biden Administration's decision to appeal the ruling by the federal judge.

For the first time, after fastidiously avoiding writing about politics when it came to the federal mask mandate debate, I’m writing about politics and the federal mask mandate debate.

Strap in.

It’s not that I didn’t believe the mask mandate wasn’t political prior to this. Of course it was. To be frank, I just didn’t buy the whole “You’re taking away my personal freedoms!” argument especially when they were backed up by the cowardly acts of violence against flight attendants.

But now that a federal judge in Tampa, Fla., on Monday has voided the federal mask mandate, it’s a political hot potato with one basic question to ponder:

MORE Features & Advice

Travel Industry Expected to Make Full Recovery by 2025

Summer Camping Essentials for Your Next Trip

Details on the Launch of the First Caribbean Events Website

Is it worth it for the Biden Administration to fight this?

There are two schools of thought here, one more immediate and the other more long term. The Department of Justice said late Tuesday it would appeal the judge’s ruling and try to reinstate the mandate, at least until the next expiration date of May 3.

One school of thought would have been to let it pass. After all the lobbying the airlines have done to have the mandate removed, after all the violent incidents by unruly passengers in which nearly three-quarters of them were mask-related, President Biden could have used this ruling as his ‘out.’ He could have simply said that the government was prepared to lift the mandate anyway when it came up for expiration again on May 3.

But the other school of thought has longer term political repercussions. If the current administration, and the Democratic party in general, had let this pass they would have basically tacitly admitted they just had their lunch served to them by a 35-year-old judge appointed by Donald Trump. A judge who, by the way, was rated as “Not Qualified” for the position by a majority of the American Bar Association's Standing Committee due to "the short time she has actually practiced law and her lack of meaningful trial experience,” according to USA Today.

Talk about a talking point, right?

Tell me that wouldn’t be a topic of debate heading into the mid-term elections in November? Tell me that wouldn’t be an issue of discussion going into the 2024 national elections? Absolutely it will. Frankly, if it was me, I’d be shouting it from the nearest airport that a lone judge had the you-know-what to take on the federal government.

And won.

Where it goes from here is unknown. It’s probably fair to say that a good portion of fliers are thrilled that the 15-month-old mask mandate has been lifted. But it’s also true that there’s a sizeable and vocal portion of travelers who will still wear masks and are apprehensive about being on a full, congested plane – no matter how many strides the airlines have made with health advancements such as HEPA filters.

One thing is for sure, however. If the federal mask mandate was political before, now it’s political on steroids.