COMPULSORY VACCINATION AND STERILIZATION: CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS
Authors: Thomas Reed Powell
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1943)

Article1 April 1943COMPULSORY VACCINATION AND STERILIZATION: CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTSTHOMAS REED POWELLTHOMAS REED POWELLSearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-18-4-637 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptAny statute or administrative order authorizing or compelling involuntary medical or surgical treatment has the possibility of being scrutinized and countermanded by the Supreme Court of the United States. Where the deed is done before the Supreme Court can forbid it, there still may be suits against the perpetrators for damages, and the Supreme Court can decide whether the statute relied on for justification is one entitled to constitutional sanction. In deciding such issues the Supreme Court has no other primary guide than the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution that "No State shall . . ....1 197 U. S. 11 (1905). Google Scholar2 Id. at 30. Google Scholar3 Ibid. Google Scholar4 197 U. S., at 27-28. Google Scholar5 Id. at 39. Google Scholar6 Id. at 29. Google Scholar7 274 U. S. 200 (1927). Google Scholar8 316 U. S. 535 (1942). Google Scholar9 274 U. S., at 207. Google Scholar10 Ibid. Google Scholar11 274 U. S., at 208. Google Scholar12 Id. at 207. Google Scholar13 316 U. S., at 546. Google Scholar14 Id. at 540, quoted from 274 U. S., at 208. Google Scholar15 316 U. S., at 541. Google Scholar16 "Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, far-reaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty. We mention these matters not to reëxamine the scope of the police power of the States. We advert to them merely in emphasis of our view that strict scrutiny of the classification which a State makes in a sterilization law is essential, lest unwittingly, or otherwise, invidious discriminations are made against groups or types of individuals in violation of the constitutional guaranty of just and equal laws. The guaranty of 'equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws.' Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356, 369. When the law lays an unequal hand on those who have committed intrinsically the same quality of offense and sterilizes one and not the other, it has made as invidious a discrimination as if it had selected a particular race or nationality for oppressive treatment. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, supra; Gaines v. Canada, 305 U. S. 337" (316 U. S., at 541.) Google Scholar17 See Guinn v. United States, 238 U. S. 347 (1915); Lane v. Wilson, 307 U. S. 268 (1939). Google Scholar18 316 U. S., at 538. Google Scholar19 Id. at 544. Google Scholar20 Id. at 545. Google Scholar21 Id. at 546. Google Scholar22 Id. at 544. Google Scholar23 309 U. S. 270 (1940). Google Scholar24 Id. at 276. Google Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Cambridge, Massachusetts*Received for publication February 13, 1943. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited bySterilization 1 April 1943Volume 18, Issue 4Page: 637-646 ePublished: 1 December 2008 Issue Published: 1 April 1943 PDF downloadLoading ...