If they can quarantine a visibly healthy nurse with no sign or

[branford]

16. The provision is of little value without the implementing regulations

and other relevant provisions, and more importantly, applicable legal decisions.

Note also that quarantine provisions are largely the province of state law. If Ms. Hilcox wishes to challenge her confinement, her avenues include both constitutional concerns and whether the state is properly complying with state law. Your citation, however, appears to concern CDC quarantine authority, and since in this instance only Maine is seeking the quarantine, the provisions, at best, have only minor persuasive authority.

The matter is simply far more complicated than many suggest, its resolution will likely occur in the appellate courts, if not the Supreme Court, and given that the 21 day incubation and quarantine period is rapidly coming to its conclusion, the matter might be rendered moot well before any final decision.

As a general matter, and as most trial attorneys would readily concede, courts are generally very deferential to state decisions in matters of public health. Comparisons to criminal matters and process is not appropriate. In light of the fact that the quarantine period is only three weeks, and in the case of Ms. Hilcox, in her own home, the matter is very public with around 80% supporting the quarantine, and Ms. Hilcox will not suffer any permanent harm from the quarantine, I would expect the typical deference to be quite apparent. Moreover, since courts generally maintain the status quo (i.e., quarantine) pending their final decisions, including appeals, the quarantine period may often end before substantive action (and it may provide many courts with a means to punt on rendering a sensitive opinion that could be reversed on appeal).

I would also note that Ms. Hilcox can possibly win the battle, and lose the proverbial war. She is very unpopular, and her attitude has not endeared her to many. Even if she wins, her reputation in her community is probably irreparably damaged. She's becoming the face of Ebola in the USA, and she doesn't even appear to have the disease. If she loses, she may end-up back in the tent quarantine due to her expressed unwillingness to comply with the quarantine conditions, and regardless of a win or loss, the public spectacle of an unpopular legal challenge will terribly injure the credibility and public trust in these aid workers. Ms. Hilcox appears to view herself and those like her as heroes. The public, however, is rapidly beginning to view them as selfish villains.