(Bloomberg) -- The Biden administration is wrestling with whether to appeal a ruling that eliminated the mask mandate for plane and train travel, as some argue the best way to preserve the government’s authority may be to let the case die.

Monday’s federal court ruling scuttling the requirement poses a difficult legal and political calculus for President Joe Biden and the Justice Department, with airlines opposed to the mandate and widespread public exhaustion with masking.

The government’s top priority is to protect what power it has left to enact a mandate months down the road if there’s another surge in Covid-19 cases, administration officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity as deliberations continue. 

Appealing carries a significant downside, said Andy Slavitt, a former Covid response team official for the Biden administration. 

Risks of an Appeal

“While it’s highly tempting to appeal a very dubious ruling like this, there is a risk in doing so,” Slavitt said. “If they appeal and lose, the CDC could end up powerless to take some basic public health precautions in the event of a surge in cases in the fall or winter.” With a slew of Trump-appointed judges, he said, “that concern has to weigh on them.”

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said she wouldn’t “prejudge the Department of Justice and how they make considerations or assessments about whether or not they’re going to appeal.” 

“We obviously feel confident in our authorities here,” Psaki said Tuesday to reporters on Air Force One. 

The ruling was issued by U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, who was nominated by Donald Trump and confirmed by the Senate in November 2020 after being admitted to the Florida bar in September 2012. She was the eighth federal judge confirmed during the Trump administration to be rated “not qualified” by the American Bar Association, which typically requires a minimum of 12 years of experience to rate a nominee qualified.

Republicans have accused the ABA of being biased against conservatives. 

Read More: Trump Judge in Mask Mandate Case Was Rated Unqualified By ABA

Mizelle’s ruling, while momentous, is just one front in the culture war over the pandemic response, in which conservative groups have pushed back against what they say are onerous public health measures and pursued legal challenges to rein in agency authority.

‘Huge Mistake’

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention argued that planes, trains and airports are unique disease vectors, with passengers often jammed up against one another for long stretches of time. Still, it extended the mandate by only 15 days last week, its shortest yet, and appeared poised to lift it if cases and hospitalizations driven by the BA.2 subvariant of the coronavirus -- the pandemic’s latest threat -- don’t surge. 

Appealing would be a “huge mistake” for Biden, said Peter Pitts, co-founder of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest and a former associate commissioner at the Food and Drug Administration.

The science behind Covid-19 right now is that BA.2 typically has mild symptoms, particularly for the vaccinated and boosted, as well as a very low death rate, he said. At this point, mandatory mask wearing serves only to divide the public while serving no health purpose, exacerbating “mask PTSD” for some and serving as a “virtue signal” for others, Pitts said.

Read More: U.S. Stops Mask Requirement on Planes After Judge’s Ruling

The Biden administration is weighing the politics, said Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law. 

“I think they’re being cautious in trying to think this though,” Tobias said. “There’s some tension, with a lot of state governors and legislators deciding that very comprehensive masking is not ideal.”

Discussions continued within the administration on Tuesday, with some officials saying they believed an appeal was growing unlikely and others arguing it remained unclear. All the legal options are problematic in one way or another, one said.

Switch to FAA?

An appeal would go to the federal appeals court in Atlanta, which is ideologically conservative and might side with Mizelle, Tobias said. And her ruling drew heavily on a Supreme Court decision striking down vaccine mandates, raising the specter of the top court upholding the ruling as well.

Their calculation is likely to be whether an appeal would probably end up at the high court, said Eric Feldman, professor of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. “And the Supreme Court’s not likely to be all that sympathetic to the government’s position on this,” he said. 

Feldman said a loss is “likely” and a win “isn’t all that useful on this,” adding, “I think they’ll regroup and they’ll let it sit.” 

Instead, he said, the administration should consider whether another agency, such as the Federal Aviation Administration, might have the authority to impose similar restrictions.

The case is Health Freedom Defense Fund v. Joseph Biden, 21-cv-1693, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Tampa).

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.