The United States has implemented stringent travel restrictions on its citizens who may have been exposed to simultaneous outbreaks of Ebola and hantavirus. Experts warn these measures could clash with legal rights and deter future volunteers in international public health emergencies.
The newly enforced restrictions underscore the authorities’ prior commitments to public health strategies aimed at controlling the spread of these diseases. Reports indicate pushback from the White House regarding the repatriation of Americans exposed to the outbreaks.
Currently, the US is opting not to repatriate an American doctor infected with Ebola, along with six others who have been exposed. Instead, these individuals are being relocated to medical facilities in Germany and the Czech Republic, as announced by officials on Wednesday.
Alexandra Phelan, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, expressed concern over the potential increase in US citizens and residents wishing to return from Ebola-affected areas. She emphasized that such unofficial policies could significantly discourage volunteers critical to the region’s healthcare response efforts.
“This outbreak has the potential to become far more severe, necessitating substantial international support,” Phelan remarked.
This action follows mandatory quarantine protocols in Nebraska for passengers from the MV Hondius, who were exposed to the Andes virus, a type of hantavirus. This decision was made despite some passengers’ wishes to undergo quarantine at home.
The American Ebola patient is now hospitalized in Germany in stable condition, while the other US citizens were on their way to Germany or Czechia, Satish Pillai, the Ebola response lead at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), told journalists on Wednesday. “These people, who remain asymptomatic, are being moved to ensure that they have access to the specialized care if needed,” he said.
When asked why these locations were chosen, instead of evacuating the Americans home as in previous outbreaks, Pillai said they were the “most expeditious” options in a fast-changing situation with “the need to move quickly”, adding that “these locations were chosen based on the needs that were present at that time.” Czechia in particular is not known for its experience in treating viral hemorrhagic fevers, but Pillai said it had an existing relationship with the US state department and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response.
During the 2014-15 outbreak, Trump was outspoken about Ebola, posting frequent calls on social media for Americans who had Ebola or were exposed to the virus to be turned away. People who volunteer to help in Ebola outbreaks “must suffer the consequences”, he said in August 2014.
In this outbreak, the White House opposed bringing at-risk Americans home, according to reporting by the Washington Post. Pillai would not confirm in the press conference on Wednesday that the White House made this decision, instead pointing to “the conditions on the ground” and “the need to rapidly mobilize”.
But the law on being able to return home is “really simple”, Phelan said. US citizens and green card holders have a legal right to return to the United States. The order on travel restrictions issued on Monday is clear that it doesn’t apply to US citizens. And the US has some of the best biocontainment facilities, medical care and treatment options in the world, Phelan added. “Millions of dollars have been poured into these facilities for exactly this situation.”
Doubt about whether health workers and other outbreak responders may return to the US could mean fewer Americans volunteer to help stop the outbreak, Phelan said.
“Any other indications that Americans are being prevented from returning home in some way, shape or form, would serve as disincentives to support that may be absolutely vital to the international response to this growing crisis.” Phelan addded.
Craig Spencer, a doctor who contracted Ebola after volunteering in Guinea in 2014 and who was attacked online by Trump, said in an interview four years later that it was already difficult to find nurses and doctors who could take the time to volunteer – and the possibility of not returning home would mean fewer people would be able to help, the epidemic would continue, and the risks to everyone would increase with a less-controlled outbreak: “a pure disaster”, Spencer said.
When asked if this policy would deter volunteers, Pillai pointed to existing organizations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda that “have been integral in providing healthcare support” already.
When passengers on the hantavirus-stricken cruise ship were flown back to the US, officials first ruled out the idea of mandating quarantine.
But now, they are requiring certain passengers to remain in the Nebraska biocontainment facility until the end of the month – even though some passengers have attempted to leave and quarantine at home.
“The decision was made across the leadership in the US government to have the passengers stay in Nebraska until 31 May, which marks the 21st day of their monitoring period,” David Fitter, the CDC’s hantavirus lead, told journalists on Tuesday. “We’re constantly regarding the situation and evaluating where things are.”
The decision reportedly came from Jay Bhattacharya, who is performing some of the duties of CDC director until the nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Angela Perryman, a 47-year-old woman who had conversations with a passenger who later died from the Andes virus, told the New York Times that she had tested negative and had no symptoms, and would like to quarantine in an Airbnb in south Florida. Another passenger, a 30-year-old man, said he would like to quarantine in New York state.
Bhattacharya rose to prominence by pushing back against public health measures, which he loosely terms “lockdowns”, in the Covid pandemic. In 2023, he criticized the US Air Force Academy for quarantining cadets; two students later killed themselves. Bhattacharya highlighted the “harms of social isolation” and said the situation was “tragic”.
“Any public health measure that is imposed has to be based on reasonable scientific evidence or principles, and has to be proportionate and necessary to achieve the public health outcome,” Phelan said.
The guiding concept in global health law is implementing “the least restrictive measure necessary to achieve the public health outcome”, she added. If a measure is more restrictive than necessary, then it is infringing on personal rights.
Most people want to follow quarantine directions, but they may be more comfortable in their own home, where the long quarantine time may be more bearable. In public health, “the preference is to use voluntary home quarantine as the least restrictive option available,” Phelan said.
In the case of passengers testing negative with no symptoms and a safe way to return home, “I could see a reasonable judge making that conclusion,” she said.
There is a previous case for comparison, and it goes back to the Ebola outbreak of 2014. When Kaci Hickox, a nurse who treated patients in west Africa, returned to the United States, the CDC did not require her to quarantine in a facility. But Chris Christie, the then governor of New Jersey, attempted to mandate quarantine – a move that eventually the courts rejected.
