Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 2, 2025
Bottom line
The bill seeks to integrate the study and mitigation of structural racism and police violence into the core mission of public health, directing federal resources towards research, data collection, and interventions to address these issues as determinants of health.
What it actually does
This bill establishes two new programs within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): a National Center on Antiracism and Health and a Law Enforcement Violence Prevention Program. These entities are tasked with conducting research, collecting and analyzing data, awarding grants, and developing interventions aimed at understanding and eliminating structural racism and police violence as public health issues. The bill also defines "antiracism" and "antiracist" for the purposes of its implementation.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill provides a crucial framework for addressing deeply entrenched health disparities that disproportionately affect communities of color, asserting that structural racism and police violence are undeniable public health crises. They contend that a scientific, data-driven approach is essential to develop effective interventions and policies that promote health equity and dismantle systemic barriers to well-being.
Opponents contend
Critics may argue that the bill's definitions of "racism" and "antiracism" are overly broad or politically charged, potentially leading to the politicization of public health agencies and diverting resources from traditional public health functions. Concerns could also be raised about federal overreach into local law enforcement matters and the feasibility of implementing such wide-ranging programs within the CDC's existing structure.
The bill is concise and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions and intent within a short timeframe.
Sections 1 and 2
Short Title and Definitions
This section establishes the bill's official short title as the "Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2025." It also defines key terms: "antiracism" as a collection of antiracist policies leading to racial equity, substantiated by antiracist ideas; and "antiracist" as any measure that produces or sustains racial equity between racial groups. These definitions are foundational to the bill's purpose and the activities of the new centers.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that clear definitions are essential for establishing a consistent and effective approach to addressing racism as a public health issue, ensuring that federal efforts are targeted and measurable towards achieving racial equity.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that these definitions are prescriptive and could limit scientific inquiry or lead to ideological interpretations within public health, potentially alienating those who hold different views on the nature of racism.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between providing clear guidance for a novel public health approach and potentially limiting the scope or flexibility of scientific and programmatic work through specific definitions.
Section 3, amending Part B of title III of the Public Health Service Act
Establishment of National Center on Antiracism and Health
This provision establishes the National Center on Antiracism and Health (the 'Center') within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Center's mission includes declaring racism a public health crisis, developing new knowledge in antiracism science and practice, transferring that knowledge into interventions, and contributing to national and global conversations about racism's health impacts. The Director of the CDC is required to appoint a director for the Center with experience living in and working with racial and ethnic minority communities.
Section 3, new 320C(a)(2)(A)
Research and Data Collection Mandates for Antiracism Center
The Center is mandated to conduct research, collect, analyze, and publicly disseminate data on the science and practice of antiracism, the public health impacts of structural racism, and the effectiveness of intervention strategies. Specific research topics include policies with disparate health impacts on communities of color, the public health effects of implicit racial bias, White supremacy, weathering, xenophobia, discrimination, prejudice, and the social determinants of health (poverty, housing, employment, political participation, environmental factors) resulting from structural racism. It also covers the intersection of racism with other systems of oppression like age, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability status.
Section 3, new 320C(a)(2)(B)-(C)
Grants and Regional Centers of Excellence
The Center is authorized to award noncompetitive grants and cooperative agreements to eligible public and nonprofit private entities, including State, local, territorial, and Tribal health agencies and organizations, for research and data activities related to antiracism. Additionally, it must establish at least three regional centers of excellence in antiracism, located in racial and ethnic minority communities. These regional centers will focus on developing new knowledge in the science and practice of antiracism in health, including researching racial and ethnic inequities in health care access and outcomes, and the history of successful antiracist movements in health.
Section 3, new 320C(a)(2)(D)-(E)
Data Clearinghouse and Public Education
The Center is directed to establish a clearinghouse within the CDC for the collection and storage of data generated under its programs. This data must be comprehensive, disaggregated by various demographic factors (racial, ethnic, primary language, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, and disability disparities), made publicly available, and protected for individual privacy in compliance with HIPAA. Additionally, the Center is tasked with providing information and education to the public on the public health impacts of structural racism and on antiracist public health interventions.
Section 3, new 320C(a)(2)(F)-(H)
Internal Coordination and Tribal Consultation
The Center is required to consult with other CDC Centers and National Institutes, including the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity and the Center for State, Tribal, Local, and Territorial Support, to ensure that all CDC scientific and programmatic activities consider structural racism in their design and execution. This includes integrating measures of racism into population-based surveys, establishing a Federal Advisory Committee on racism and health, developing training programs for public health professionals on race and antiracism, and providing standards for data collection. Furthermore, the Center must coordinate with the Indian Health Service and the CDC's Tribal Advisory Committee, engaging in government-to-government consultation with Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations, and respecting Tribal data sovereignty.
Section 4(a)-(b)
Establishment of Law Enforcement Violence Prevention Program
This section directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a law enforcement violence prevention program within the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the CDC. The program's general duties include conducting research and providing leadership and coordination to understand the public health impacts of uses of force by law enforcement (including police brutality and violence), developing public health interventions to eliminate related deaths, injury, trauma, and negative mental health effects, and ensuring comprehensive data collection, analysis, and reporting in consultation with the Department of Justice and independent researchers.
Section 4(c)
Functions of Police Violence Prevention Program
This provision details the specific functions of the law enforcement violence prevention program. These include summarizing knowledge on law enforcement-related death and injury, conducting research and preparing statistics on police brutality, studying factors influencing it, providing public information, and developing a strategic plan for research. The program is also authorized to award grants for epidemiologic research and interventions to reduce police violence, coordinate with the Department of Justice and other agencies on data standardization, submit annual reports to Congress with recommendations, conduct primary research on control options, and study alternatives to law enforcement response as a method of reducing police violence.
The bill defines 'antiracism' as a collection of antiracist policies that lead to racial equity, substantiated by antiracist ideas, and 'antiracist' as any measure that produces or sustains racial equity between racial groups.
Section 2, Definitions
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to define terms upfront, but their specific wording is critical to the bill's intent and scope.
Case for: Supporters argue that clear, explicit definitions are necessary to guide the new Center's work, ensuring a consistent and focused approach to achieving racial equity in public health.
Case against: Critics might argue that these definitions are prescriptive and could lead to a narrow or ideological interpretation of 'racism' and 'equity' within a scientific agency, potentially limiting the scope of inquiry or alienating diverse perspectives.
Estimated impact: These definitions will shape all research, data collection, and intervention strategies undertaken by the National Center on Antiracism and Health.
The National Center on Antiracism and Health is mandated to consult with other CDC centers to ensure scientific and programmatic activities consider structural racism, specifically including 'putting measures of racism in population-based surveys'.
Section 3, new 320C(a)(2)(F)(i)
Why it matters:Likely standard legislative drafting for detailing specific actions within a broader directive, but its specific nature makes it consequential.
Case for: Proponents argue that integrating direct measures of racism into existing population surveys is a critical step for systematically collecting data on the prevalence and impact of racism, providing an essential evidence base for public health interventions.
Case against: Critics might raise concerns about the methodology and validity of 'measures of racism' in surveys, potential for subjective interpretation, or privacy implications, arguing it could lead to unreliable data or public mistrust.
Estimated impact: This provision would significantly expand the scope of federal population health surveys, potentially yielding new national data on experiences of racism and their correlation with health outcomes.
Among its functions, the law enforcement violence prevention program is directed to 'study alternatives to law enforcement response as a method of reducing police violence'.
Section 4(c)(8)
Why it matters:Could be standard enumeration, but its placement at the end of a list of functions might diminish its perceived importance compared to other items.
Case for: Supporters argue that studying alternatives to traditional law enforcement responses is crucial for developing innovative, community-centered approaches to public safety that can reduce harmful police interactions and improve public health outcomes.
Case against: Opponents, particularly from law enforcement, might view this as an implicit criticism of policing or an attempt to defund police, arguing that such studies could undermine public safety or promote impractical solutions.
Estimated impact: This provision could lead to federal research and recommendations supporting the development and implementation of non-police responses to certain community issues, potentially shifting public safety paradigms.