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.
The Network is pleased to welcome new National Advisory Board member McClain Bryant Macklin, J.D., M.B.A. As the Director of Policy and Strategic Initiatives for the Health Forward Foundation, Ms. Bryant Macklin develops strategies for the foundation’s policy priorities in access to healthcare, the social determinants of health, and health equity.
As the pandemic in the U.S. continues to worsen, many states are requiring additional disease mitigation measures. While many governors continue to utilize their executive authority under state emergency management laws to protect the public’s health, enforcement of public health orders at the state and local level has been a challenge across the country. One potential solution is for local jurisdictions to utilize civil infractions as an enforcement mechanism for public health orders through the enactment of ordinances.
The current pandemic demonstrates the need for careful and explicit consideration of public health reporting provisions in privacy law. In federally assisted substance use treatment facilities, a lack of clear and standardized public health reporting regulations raises questions about how communicable disease reporting occurs in these settings, including whether the burden of disease among specific patient populations is accurately tracked.
Some of the public health law and policy issues in the headlines in recent weeks include challenges to public health powers; vaccine data and privacy concerns; COVID vaccination mandates and health care workers; California’s proposed legislation extending the state’s eviction moratorium; pandemic-induced food insecurity; the Biden administration’s plans for addressing the ongoing drug epidemic; vaccine distribution challenges faced by states; and the Supreme Court ruling on religious freedoms and COVID restrictions.
This paper identifies barriers to OAT access and potential solutions to improve OAT uptake in eight sectors.
The Network’s Harm Reduction Legal Project works to address the legal and policy barriers that impede the establishment and expansion of evidence-based harm reduction measures such as naloxone distribution, syringe access programs, and access to evidence-based substance use disorder treatment. One of the questions frequently received by the Project is whether federal law prohibits harm reduction organizations and similar groups who are authorized to distribute naloxone from mailing the medication.
Even though cannabis is still illegal under federal law; most Americans (91 percent) favor the legalization of cannabis either for medical or recreational use. This is a serious change in public opinion. In 2010, 52 percent of Americans opposed the legalization of cannabis. This more accepting view of cannabis appeared in the 2020 election, with five states legalizing cannabis through ballot measures. With the legalization trend, it is important to understand the legal process behind the ballot measures that have been central to changing state cannabis laws.
