ABSTRACT
Drawing on work done on mandatory vaccination by the Lex-Atlas: COVID-19 project and published in The Lancet, the author will explore the question of the relationship between mobility restrictions, human rights, and effective pandemic responses. Does respect for fundamental human rights norms tolerate an exceptionless ironclad strategy of pandemic management? Should programs rather make space for exceptions, as do programs of mandatory vaccination vis-à-vis those who are medically advised to decline vaccination? Should the law courts stand ready to mandate such exceptions on an ad hoc basis? While this issue raises ethical, constitutional, and legal sub-questions, it is also one that is often best resolved examining particular contexts. This chapter will do so by examining legal challenges to mobility restrictions—both travel and stay-at-home orders—around the world and considering the merits of such challenges in broader policy and ethical terms.
