U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division

Office of the Assistant Attorney General

Washington, D.C. 20530

May 22, 2020

Mayor Eric Garcetti
City of Los Angeles
200 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Director Barbara Ferrer
County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Health
313 North Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Mayor Garcetti and Director Ferrer:
Reports of your recent public statements indicate that you suggested the possibility
of long-term lockdown of the residents in the City and County of Los Angeles, regardless
of the legal justification for such restrictions. Any such approach may be both arbitrary
and unlawful.
In particular, it has been reported that on May 12, 2020, Public Health Director
Ferrer stated that a form of stay-at-home restrictions will remain in Los Angeles County
“for the next three months” unless a vaccine for COVID-19 is developed. On May 13,
2020, during an interview on ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” Mayor Garcetti
stated that Los Angeles would “never be completely open until we have a cure” for
COVID-19. More recently, Mayor Garcetti clarified some of these comments. However,
we remain concerned about what may be an arbitrary and heavy-handed approach to
continuing stay-at-home requirements.
The U.S. Department of Justice recognizes and appreciates the duty that you have
to protect the health and safety of the residents of the Los Angeles area in the midst of a
pandemic that is unprecedented in our lifetimes. The Department also acknowledges that
mayors and other public officials have broad authority to act to protect their residents
during a public health crisis. Governmental authority, however, is not limitless, and must
be exercised reasonably. As the United States Supreme Court recognized 115 years ago,
temporary emergency measures may restrict our constitutional rights, but they must also

 have some “real or substantial relation” to the emergency. Jacobson v. Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 31 (1905). In assessing a local government’s powers in a
public health emergency, the “power of a local community to protect itself against an
epidemic threatening the safety of all, might be exercised in particular circumstances and
in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go
so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public, as to authorize or
compel the courts to interfere for the protection of such persons.” Jacobson, 197 U.S. at
28.
The Department of Justice does not seek to dictate how cities and counties such as
Los Angeles determine what degree of activity and personal interaction should be
allowed to protect the safety of their citizens. However, we are charged with protecting
the federal statutory and constitutional rights of all persons in our country, and ensuring
that governmental restrictions are not unconstitutionally burdensome. Even in times of
emergency, when governments may impose reasonable and temporary restrictions, the
Constitution and federal statutory law prohibit arbitrary, unreasonable actions. Simply
put, there is no pandemic exception to the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Should you wish to discuss this
further, please contact Nicola T. Hanna, United States Attorney for the Central District of
California, at (213) 894-2406.
Sincerely,
05/22/2020
Eric S. Dreiband
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
cc: Nicola T. Hanna, United States Attorney, Central District of California