Arguments in favor of travel restrictions during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020

This page captures the main arguments that have been advanced in favor of travel restrictions during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. These arguments come from a variety of sources, including public officials, journalists, think tanks, economists, scientists, and other stakeholders. We encourage you to share the debates happening in your local community to editor@ballotpedia.org.

There are two main types of arguments for travel restrictions:

• Travel restrictions prevent the spread of the virus
• Travel restrictions promote the state's safety image
• Travel restrictions are constitutional
• Travel restrictions protect tourism workers

Click here to read about the main arguments against travel restrictions.

Travel restrictions prevent the spread of the virus

Claim: Travel restrictions and quarantines help contain the Covid-19 virus

• Office of Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy (R) (Anchorage Press): "This [quarantine and travel restriction] mandate is issued to protect the public health of Alaskans. The Governor looks to establish consistent mandates across the state in order to mitigate the impact of COVID-19. The goal is to flatten the curve and prevent the spread of the virus. The purpose of this mandate is to control the ingress to Alaska from outside localities in order to prevent the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19." - "All people arriving in Alaska must quarantine for 14 days, Governor says," March 23, 2020.

• Dr. Marc Siegel, clinical professor of medicine NYU Langone Health (USA Today): "I am not a fan of full lockdowns because of the damage they do to the economy, and to our mental and physical health. But if we can’t get the population to behave in a socially responsible manner, we might have no choice. Travel restrictions may be limited by the Constitution, but keeping in mind that this is a national disaster, the best public health measure would be to temporarily shut down travel from hot spots while authorities there work to contain the spread. Simply imposing a two-week self-quarantine on visitors from those areas, as New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is doing, could be ineffective as too many will evade detection." - "If Americans keep ignoring COVID-19 safety precautions, we'll have to shut down. Again.," June 30, 2020.

• International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) researchers (Homeland Preparedness News): "In the face of decreasing public appetite for travel restrictions, and understandable concern over the economic consequences of drastic lockdown measures, we want to support and strengthen the decisions taken by European and most other governments in this regard. The policies they introduced appear to have played a particular role in reducing COVID-19 cases, flattening the curve, relieving stress on the healthcare system, and, ultimately, saving lives.' The study concludes that air traffic allows the virus to jump countries and continents in a very short time." - "Study looks at effectiveness of travel bans on slowing COVID-19 spread in Europe," August 5, 2020.

Claim: Travel restrictions can prevent COVID-19 spread in travel and tourism destinations

• Katherine Florey, UC-Davis School of Law (Palm Springs Desert Sun): "Reopening plans should acknowledge that activities that encourage travel increase risk. A destination restaurant is more likely to bring COVID-19 to a low-prevalence community than a diner filled with locals." - "We can control state-to-state COVID-19 spread. Here's how.," July 30, 2020.

Travel restrictions promote the state's safety image

Claim: Travel restrictions can positively impact tourism economy

• Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) (Patch.com): Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) discussed the state's travel restrictions requiring travelers or returning residents from states with a 5 percent or higher positive rate to either quarantine for 14 days or attest to a negative coronavirus test.

  "I think it could be a selling point for Rhode Island. Come here and safely vacation. Come here, get yourself tested, and know that this is a place with a 2, 3, 4 percent test-positive rate. Not Texas, where it's 14 percent." - "RI Reopening: Travel Restrictions Set For Those Coming To State," June 29, 2020.

Travel restrictions are constitutional

Claim: States can limit travel to protect public health

• Douglass Dowty (The Post-Standard): U.S. District Judge David Hurd in rejecting a lawsuit brought by an Arizona woman who claimed the New York quarantine regulations limited her right to travel, cited a 1902 case arising from a smallpox outbreak in Massachusetts.

  "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Jacobson v. Massachusetts that local officials had wide latitude to restrict activities during a public health crisis, when faced with uncertain science. That decision, more than a century old, has come under scrutiny during the Covid crisis, Hurd acknowledged. But it still remains the test for these types of government restrictions during the pandemic. Page had argued that the government needed to craft much more targeted guidelines. She cast the Jacobson standard as outdated. After all, the rules forced healthy people to quarantine, unfairly targeting those who wanted to freely travel, she argued. But the Jacobson decision shows that state officials acted within their authority during the pandemic, Hurd ruled. And until the country’s highest court returns to the question of government powers during a public health crisis, Jacobson remains the standard. 'Jacobson was decided just after the turn of the last century, at a time when medical science was in its adolescence if not still in its infancy,' Hurd concluded. 'Because it endorses an approach to constitutional analysis that has fallen out of fashion, it is admittedly strange — and even a little alarming — to discover that Jacobson is still considered the right tool for evaluating state action taken to protect public health. Yet unless and until the Supreme Court revisits Jacobson and fashions a test that demands a more particularized showing from public health officials in light of the unbelievable medical achievements of the twenty-first century, it remains a complete roadblock to Page’s claims.'" - "New York’s 14-day quarantine rule after travel is constitutional, Upstate federal judge rules," August 11, 2020.

• Eric Friedlander, Secretary of the Kentucky Cabinet of Health and Family Services (Courthouse News Service): "These recommendations intend to limit person-to-person contact and limit interaction in locations of heavy traffic, including airports and gas stations. But the Order also limits travel to the other states, all of which have taken different measures to contain the spread of Covid-19. The facts on the ground evolve by the hour. And the Governor can only control the restrictions in place in Kentucky. To ensure these restrictions sufficiently protect Kentuckians, the Governor must take action to reduce their exposure in all other states." - "Kentucky’s Covid-19 Travel Ban Ruled Unconstitutional," May 4, 2020.

Travel restrictions protect tourism workers

Claim: Travel restrictions protect tourism workers from COVID-19 exposure

• Eric Gill, labor official (Honolulu Star-Advertiser): "Testing of frontline workers and visitors needs to be part of any plan to reopen Hawaii tourism." - "Hawaii hotel workers want protection before tourism resumes," May 28, 2020.

See also

• Documenting America's Path to Recovery
• Taxonomy of arguments about travel restrictions during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020
• Arguments against travel restrictions during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020