"We might make an announcement" is even weaker than "We will make an announcement", a gold standard of weakness to begin with.
Notice the words 'some', 'likely', and 'but' in the first sentence. This article walks back its own headline, like the previous one (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14311073).
This is valuable information because it's much easier to stop something like this before it's officially announced.
At that time it's already implemented, requires the same march through the bureaucracy to be repealed, has consequences for the administration's reputation, may invite lawsuits if airlines and airports have started spending money etc etc.
There are always urgent things going on that are more important than almost everything here. Letting HN be swayed by those means giving up on the idea of a site dedicated to intellectual curiosity, and that would be a shame.
Look at it this way: if the story happens, we'll have a thread about it. It will burn hot with toxic fumes (bad for HN) but the substantive aspects (good for HN) will hopefully outweigh that, making it worth the hit. But since the story hasn't happened yet, why burn all those health points for none of the gain?
It might be but HN is not really focused on delivering timely warnings to potential travelers.