News & Insights

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the tension between individual rights and the public good to the forefront of the national discourse. Many pandemic response measures—such as stay-at-home orders, mandatory business closures or restrictions, and mask mandates—have evoked vocal opposition by individuals who feel these measures infringe on their freedom. Despite the authority of public health to implement these measures, noncompliance has been a significant issue.

Data are essential for public health surveillance, epidemiological investigation, research, program development, implementation and evaluation. A complex legal landscape, and lack of knowledge and training in law, result in actual or perceived barriers to data collection, use and sharing. As a result, opportunities are missed to use and share electronic data to improve the health of communities, promote wellness, address social determinants of health and increase health equity.

Organizations across the country reached out to the Network for our leadership and expertise, and we played a vital role in the nationwide response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The first in a series of articles by Network attorneys on major public health law and policy developments over the past 10 years. In this article, Eastern Region Office Director Kathleen Hoke shares her insights into how laws designed to reduce the harm from tobacco use have changed, and the significant strides the public health community has made to reduce tobacco use initiation and increase tobacco cessation.

Some of the public health law and policy issues in the headlines in recent weeks include planned charges in the Flint water probe; Supreme Court ruling on abortion issue; obstacles in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout; calls for better public health data to combat the pandemic; public health issues facing the Biden administration; the impact of the EPA’s ‘secret science’ rule; and controversy over proposed vaccination distribution strategies.

The desire to predict and prevent violence by young people is understandable and valid, particularly in the wake of school violence tragedies like Columbine, Parkland, and Sandy Hook. Just this week, a teenager made national news when he shot and killed his entire family. Communities do have a valid interest in identifying its members who are more likely to perpetrate violence, even when those perpetrators are children. However, that interest must be carefully balanced with the equally important competing interests of privacy and equity.

The United States continues to experience an unprecedented level of drug-related harm. While the failure to prevent this harm is most notable in the number of overdose deaths, which are now at their highest level on record, it is evident in other areas as well. Of particular importance from a policy perspective, bloodborne disease infections related to syringe sharing are also on the rise, with recent outbreaks in Kentucky, Massachusetts, and Indiana, among other states. Cases of infective endocarditis, which is caused largely by unsafe injection, are increasing as well.

Local health departments play a crucial role in prescribing and administering COVID-19 vaccines and in supervising and administering COVID-19 vaccination programs. This new role has raised questions about the liability protections available to local health departments and their employees under the Federal PREP Act.

Each year, millions of Americans receive unexpected and often unaffordable medical bills that are not only an economic hardship, but can also dissuade them from seeking needed medical care in the future. On December 21, 2020, Congress passed the No Surprises Act as part of the $900 billion COVID-19 spending deal. The Act addresses one of the main causes of unexpected bills, banning the practice of “balance billing,” where out-of-network medical providers bill patients for costs not covered by the patient’s health insurance.

Some of the public health law and policy issues in the headlines in recent weeks include planned charges in the Flint water probe; Supreme Court ruling on abortion issue; obstacles in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout; calls for better public health data to combat the pandemic; public health issues facing the Biden administration; the impact of the EPA’s ‘secret science’ rule; and controversy over proposed vaccination distribution strategies.

In 2010, the same year that the Network launched, the ACA was enacted and the nation took a critical step toward improving access to health care. Now, ten years later and in the wake of the pandemic, we know there is still much to be done and that we must build not only on the advances made by the ACA, but strategize and argue for systemic change on multiple levels.

With growing interest in tackling structural and other forms of racism, this is a good time to consider how theory is fundamental to bringing about meaningful, practical change. The theories that guide us may be consciously thought out or unreflectively adopted. Therefore, it is necessary to intentionally unpack and understand the norms and assumptions that are built into our day-to-day practices and long-term strategies to bring about reforms.