The courts and public health: Caught in a pincer movement

W.E. Parmet and P.D. Jacobson

American Journal of Public Health, 2014, vol. 104, issue 3, 392-397

Abstract: Public health practitioners are familiar with the general outlines of legal authority and with judicial standards for reviewing public health regulations. What may not be as familiar are 3 emerging judicial doctrines that pose considerable risks to public health initiatives. We explain the contentious series of judicial rulings that now place health departments' broad grant of authority in jeopardy. One doctrine invokes the First Amendment to limit regulatory authority. The second involves the Supreme Court's reinterpretation of federalism to limit both federal and state public health interventions. The third redefines the standard of evidence required to support regulations. Together, these judicial trends create a pincer movement that places substantial new burdens on the ability of health departments to protect health.

Keywords: article; human; legal aspect; organization and management; professional practice; public health service; United States, Constitution and Bylaws; Humans; Professional Autonomy; Public Health Administration; Public Health Practice; United States (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301738

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2013.301738_2

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301738

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().