Court Opinion

ID: 9576724
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:27:43.410382+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:13:35.484810
License: Public Domain

Legge, Acting Justice
(dissenting).
As stated in Gasque, Inc. v. Nates, 191 S. C. 271, 2 S. E. (2d) 36, and again in McCoy v. Town of York, 193 S. C. *521390, 8 S. E. (2d) 905: “To be valid as a legislative exercise of police power, the legislation must be clearly demanded for the public safety, health, peace, morals or general welfare.” At most, the record in the present case shows that in the opinion of many experts fluoridation of the public water supply is not harmful and is beneficial in reducing the incidence of dental cavities in young children. That, I think, falls short of a showing of such necessity in the interest of an endangered public health as is required by the constitutional test just mentioned. For this reason I respectfully dissent.