Within the broad field of healthcare law, public health law is usually seen as being concerned with the promotion of health and well-being at the societal level. Examples of the methods employed to enact and enforce health care policy at the local, state, and national levels include:

* local zoning laws to govern how many people may live or work in a given area and the minimum building standards to be followed
* local and state health department laws governing the handling, preparation, and storage of food
* State laws mandating childhood immunizations as a condition of enrollment in the public schools
* state and federal controls over the importation or intrastate transport of certain materials
* national laws concerning the health status of potential immigrants
* national laws regarding the use or disposal of hazardous substances

Even if only considering the above brief list, it should be obvious that public healthcare law can be controversial and has been the subject of much public, and courtroom debate by publicly- and privately-employed healthcare lawyers. Some hotly debated topics are:

Can a state or federal environmental agency regulate what is being done on private property?

It has been argued that the “greater public good” of regulation outweighs the arguments for privacy. The question then arises that if the “greater public good” is to be served at the expense of property rights, does the individual truly own that property? Can local, state, or federal government order a person to be held against their will, in quarantine, if that person has a communicable disease?

Many public health laws give the states the power to order an individual into quarantine to prevent the spread of a communicable disease such as tuberculosis. By extension, many healthcare lawyers will argue, that power would apply to outbreaks of influenza or during bioterrorism incidents. An immediate counter-argument is the observation that if AIDS is a communicable disease, and those with AIDS are not forced into quarantine, is it therefore moral to compel another into quarantine under penalty of law?

Can healthcare lawsuits be used to shape or enforce “non-statutory policy?”

For current purposes, “non-statutory policy” will be defined as a social policy that is not codified as a written statute of law. As an example, smoking is not good for your health. Since people who smoke get sick, the large tobacco companies should be punished for making people sick and will be taken to court in a string of civil healthcare lawsuits. If restrictions that are not part of a written law are placed on tobacco companies, does this constitute the use of the courts to advance a social agenda?

From the above questions it can be seen that, at its foundational level, public health law actually deals with a number of questions arising from civil, criminal, and constitutional law. It is hoped that the reader will pause to consider similar arguments that are certain to arise in the course of future healthcare lawsuits and legislative debates.