Abstract: In response to major emergencies， the system of emergency state has played an important role in rebalancing public and private rights and provided a unified measurement for rendering social orders. The draft of Emergency Law driven by SARS in 2003 was later changed into the Emergency Response Law. The change in the approach to legislative thinking led to the lack of foundation for the Constitutional implementation of the system of emergency state， resulting in the restriction of the State in announcing the state of emergency. On the other hand， more than ten years of implementation of the Emergency Response Law has proven that the Law has not played its due part as a basic law in response to emergencies. In view of this， it is recommended that  Emergency Response Law  be revised into two parts:  Emergency Law  and  Emergency Management Law. Emergency Law should lower the thresholds of emergency announcement， classify states of emergency into typical categories and build up concrete systems according to the mid or post-phase of particularly major emergencies.  Emergency Management Law  should set up rational legislative goals by positioning itself properly as a “comprehensive law”，clarifying the functions of national emergency management system， establishing fundamental principles of emergency management and laying stipulations on major emergencies that call for coordination and comprehensive emergency management among different sectors in response to two or multi disasters. 

Key words: Emergency Law, Emergency Response Law, emergency management, Covid-19