Michelle M. Mello (
David H. Jiang, Stanford University.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2024 Jun;43(6):759-767. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2024.00073. Epub 2024 May 22.
Public health legal powers are increasingly under pressure from the courts in the United States. During the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals and organizations successfully challenged many community mitigation orders (for example, mask mandates, vaccination mandates, and restrictions on gatherings), demonstrating the legal vulnerability of disease control measures. Analyzing 112 judicial decisions in which the plaintiff prevailed from March 2020 through March 2023, we examined the ways in which courts constrained public health powers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that in these 112 decisions, courts shifted how they analyze religious liberty claims and reviewed challenges to the exercise of statutory powers by health officials in novel ways. We discuss implications for public health policy going forward, and we recommend ways in which legislatures and health officials can design policies to maximize their prospects of surviving legal challenges.
美国的公共卫生法律权力正日益受到法院的压力。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,个人和组织成功地对许多社区缓解措施(例如口罩令、疫苗接种令和集会限制)提出质疑,这表明疾病控制措施在法律上存在漏洞。通过分析 2020 年 3 月至 2023 年 3 月期间原告胜诉的 112 项司法判决,我们研究了法院在 COVID-19 大流行期间限制公共卫生权力的方式。我们发现,在这 112 项判决中,法院改变了分析宗教自由主张的方式,并以新颖的方式审查了对卫生官员行使法定权力的质疑。我们讨论了对未来公共卫生政策的影响,并为立法机构和卫生官员提出了一些建议,以设计政策,最大限度地提高其在法律挑战中生存的机会。