Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Mar-Apr;20(2):97-108.
doi: 10.1089/hs.2021.0123. Epub 2022 Feb 3.

Global Judicial Opinions Regarding Government-Issued COVID-19 Mitigation Measures

Catherine G Clodfelter  1   2 , Sarah Caron  3 , Emily L Rosenfeld  4 , Akshara Narayan Menon  5 , Amanda Sasser  6 , Emmanuelle K Mercier  7 , C Adam Brush  8
Affiliations
Review

Global Judicial Opinions Regarding Government-Issued COVID-19 Mitigation Measures

Catherine G Clodfelter et al. Health Secur. 2022 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

Laws play an important role in emergency response capacity. During the COVID-19 outbreak, experts have noted both a lack of law where it is needed and a problematic use of laws that exist. To address those challenges, policymakers revising public health emergency laws can examine how existing laws were used during the COVID-19 response to address problems that arose during their application. Judicial opinions can provide a source of data for this review. This study used legal epidemiology methods to perform an environmental scan of global judicial opinions, published from March 1 through August 31, 2020, from 23 countries, related to government-issued COVID-19 mitigation measures. The opinions were coded, and findings categorize the measures based on: (1) the World Health Organization's May 2020 publication, Overview of Public Health and Social Measures in the Context of COVID-19, and (2) related legal challenges brought in courts, including disputes about authority; conflicts of law; rationality, proportionality, or necessity; implementation; and enforcement. The findings demonstrate how judicial review of emergency measures has played a role in the COVID-19 response. In some cases, court rulings required mitigation measures to be amended or stopped. In others, court rulings required the government to issue a measure not yet in place. These findings provide examples for understanding issues related to the application of law during an emergency response.

Keywords: COVID-19; Judicial opinion; Legal aspects; Legal preparedness; Public health preparedness/response.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. World Health Organization (WHO). International Health Regulations (2005). 2nd ed. Geneva: WHO; 2008. Accessed June 29, 2020. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2008/9789241580410_eng.pdf
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO's Work in Health Emergencies, Strengthening Preparedness for Health Emergencies: Implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005). Geneva: WHO; 2021. Accessed May 31, 2021. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/documents/emergencies/a74_...
    1. Gostin LO, Habibi R, Meier BM. Has global health law risen to meet the COVID-19 challenge? Revisiting the International Health Regulations to prepare for future threats. J Law Med Ethics. 2020;48(2):376-381. - PubMed
    1. Stier DD, Nicks D, Cowan GJ. The courts, public health, and legal preparedness. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(suppl 1):S69-S73. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Muhunthan J, Angell B, Wilson A, Reeve B, Jan S. Judicial intervention in alcohol regulation: an empirical legal analysis. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2017;41(4):365-370. - PubMed