Quarantine and the Federal Role in Epidemics.

Area of Science:

• Public Health Law
• Epidemiology
• Constitutional Law

Background:

• Infectious disease threats are recurrent challenges for presidential administrations.
• State governments hold primary public health responsibility, but modern travel necessitates federal involvement.
• Recent federal quarantine regulations raise concerns regarding due process and statutory authority.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the Department of Health and Human Services and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 2017 Federal Quarantine Orders.
• To examine the potential conflict between quarantine powers and constitutional due process protections.
• To advocate for a rights-based strategy in infectious disease control.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of federal regulations concerning quarantine authority.
• Legal review of Supreme Court precedent on individual liberties and detention (e.g., United States v. Salerno).
• Examination of the balance between public health imperatives and constitutional rights.

Main Results:

• The 2017 regulations heavily rely on confinement, potentially impacting individual liberties.
• Unfettered quarantine powers can erode the rule of law and public confidence.
• Existing regulations may exceed the scope of statutory authority for imposing quarantine.

Conclusions:

• A rights-based approach to infectious disease control is essential.
• Respecting constitutional rights fosters public trust and cooperation during health crises.
• Balancing public health with individual liberties is key to effective epidemic management.