42 U.S.C. § 265
Suspension of entries and imports from designated places to prevent spread of communicable diseases
Whenever the Surgeon General determines that by reason of the existence of any communicable disease in a foreign country there is serious danger of the introduction of such disease into the United States, and that this danger is so increased by the introduction of persons or property from such country that a suspension of the right to introduce such persons and property is required in the interest of the public health, the Surgeon General, in accordance with regulations approved by the President, shall have the power to prohibit, in whole or in part, the introduction of persons and property from such countries or places as he shall designate in order to avert such danger, and for such period of time as he may deem necessary for such purpose.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (24 in the last 5 years), 2020–2026 · leading case: Nancy Huisha-Huisha v. Alejandro Mayorkas, 27 F.4th 718 (D.C. Cir. 2022).
Nancy Huisha-Huisha v. Alejandro Mayorkas, 27 F.4th 718 (D.C. Cir. 2022). “WALKER, Circuit Judge: In a public-health emergency, 42 U.S.C. § 265 authorizes the Executive Branch to “prohibit, in whole or in part, the introduction of persons and property from such countries or places as he shall designate.”
Arizona v. Biden, 40 F.4th 375 (6th Cir. 2022). “See 42 U.S.C. § 265 ; 85 Fed. Reg. 17,060 (Mar.”
Jenny Flores v. Merrick Garland, 3 F.4th 1145 (9th Cir. 2021). “” 42 U.S.C. § 265 . The stated purpose of the order was to “protect the public health from an increase in the serious danger of the introduction of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) into the land POEs, and the Border Patrol stations between POEs, at or near the United States…”
State of Texas v. Biden (N.D. Tex. 2022). “oduction of COVID-19 into the land-based POEs and Border Patrol stations at or near the United States borders with Canada and Mexico, and into the interior of the country as a whole, because COVID-19 exists in Canada, Mexico, and other countries of origin of persons who migrate…”
Refugee & Immigrant Ctr. for Educ. & Legal Servs. v. Noem (D.D.C. 2025). “§ 265 , authorizes the Surgeon General—and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), by delegation—to issue an order that “prohibit[s], in whole or in part, the introduction of persons and property from such countries or places as [the CDC] shall designate in order…”
Al Otro Lado, Inc. v. McAleenan (S.D. Cal. 2022). “traveling from 4 Canada or Mexico (regardless of their country or origin) who would otherwise be 5 introduced into a congregate setting in a land [POE] or Border Patrol station at or near the 6 United States borders with Canada and Mexico[,]” pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 265 and 268…”
Refugee & Immigrant Ctr. for Educ. & Legal Servs. v. Markwayne Mullin (D.C. Cir. 2026). “4th at 729 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 265), came with a companion “authority to expel” such persons as needed to stem the same contagion, id.”
P.J.E.S. v. Wolf (D.D.C. 2020). “42 U.S.C. § 265 (“Section 265”). In 1966, “the Surgeon General’s § 265 authority was transferred” to HHS, which in turn “delegated this authority to the [Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”)] in 2001 and [t]he President’s functions under § 265 were assigned to the Secretary of…”
Huisha-Huisha v. Gaynor (D.D.C. 2021). “42 U.S.C. § 265 (“Section 265”). In 1966, the Surgeon General’s Section 265 authority was transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), which in turn delegated this authority to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) Director.”
Refugee & Immigrant Ctr. for Educ. & Le v. Kristi Noem (D.C. Cir. 2025). “In Huisha-Huisha, this court concluded that the Surgeon General’s authority under a different statute, 42 U.S.C. § 265 , to prohibit the “introduction of persons and property” into the United States when they pose a “serious danger of the introduction of [a communicable] disease…”
Guzman Martinez v. United States (E.D. Va. 2025). “Plaintiff Guzman Martinez’s expulsion was carried out under an order grounded in 42 U.S.C. § 265 , which allows the federal government “to prohibit, in whole or in part, the introduction of persons and property” into the U.”
P.J.E.S. v. Wolf (D.D.C. 2023). “MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action is one in a tangle of cases working their way through the federal court system that either challenge or defend rules and orders issued by Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 265 implementing what has come to be known as the “Title 42…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.