Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025

Quantification and Whole Genome Characterization of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Wastewater and Air Samples
Published on: June 30, 2023
Judicial Decisions Constraining Public Health Powers During COVID-19: Implications For Public Health Policy Making
Michelle M Mello1, David H Jiang2, Wendy E Parmet3
1Michelle M. Mello (mmello@law.stanford.edu), Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Abstract:
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.
Related Concept Videos
Drug Control Governance: Regulatory Bodies and Their Impact
Standards of Care II
Standards of Care I
Sources of Law
Constitutional law is foundational, deriving from federal and state constitutions, and...
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
Issues And Trends In Healthcare Delivery System
Cost Containment
Payment for healthcare services has historically promoted adoption of costly and often unnecessary or inefficient...

