Posted on 04/30/2020 12:15:09 AM PDT by edwinland
A Michigan judge on Wednesday found that while Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home order does “temporary harm” to the constitutional rights of Michigan residents, the harm doesn’t outweigh the public health risk posed by the coronavirus outbreak.
For authority he cited Jacobson v. Massachusetts (US Supreme Court, 1905) with a straight face. That was the case "finding" that mandatory vaccination was not unconstitutional.
It was ALSO the primary case cited in the Supreme Court's third most odious decision (after Casey and Dred Scott), in which it upheld violently forced sterilization of women for eugenic purposes.
"The judgment finds the facts that have been recited and that Carrie Buck "is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted, that she may be sexually sterilized without detriment to her general health and that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization," andof innocent women thereupon makes the order. In view of the general declarations of the legislature and the specific findings of the Court, obviously we cannot say as matter of law that the grounds do not exist, and if they exist they justify the result. We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11. Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
By the way, if you're wondering where that decision led, one place it led was the Holocaust:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/feb/06/race.usa
As America's eugenics movement gathered pace, it inspired a host of imitators. In France, Belgium, Sweden, England and elsewhere in Europe, cliques of eugenicists did their best to introduce eugenic principles into national life; they could always point to recent precedents established in the United States.
Germany was no exception. From the turn of the century, German eugenicists formed academic and personal relationships with the American eugenics establishment, in particular with Charles Davenport, the pioneering founder of the Eugenics Record Office on Long Island, New York, which was backed by the Harriman railway fortune. A number of other charitable American bodies generously funded German race biology with hundreds of thousands of dollars, even after the depression had taken hold.
Germany had certainly developed its own body of eugenic knowledge and library of publications. Yet German readers still closely followed American eugenic accomplishments as the model: biological courts, forced sterilisation, detention for the socially inadequate, debates on euthanasia. As America's elite were describing the socially worthless and the ancestrally unfit as "bacteria," "vermin," "mongrels" and "subhuman", a superior race of Nordics was increasingly seen as the answer to the globe's eugenic problems. US laws, eugenic investigations and ideology became blueprints for Germany's rising tide of race biologists and race-based hatemongers.
One such agitator was a disgruntled corporal in the German army. In 1924, he was serving time in prison for mob action. While there, he spent his time poring over eugenic textbooks, which extensively quoted Davenport, Popenoe and other American ethnological stalwarts. And he closely followed the writings of Leon Whitney, president of the American Eugenics Society, and Madison Grant, who extolled the Nordic race and bemoaned its "corruption" by Jews, Negroes, Slavs and others who did not possess blond hair and blue eyes. The young German corporal even wrote one of them fan mail.
Hitler managed to turn the American left temporarily against eugenics. But that history is a third rail they don't often decide to stand upon.
In other words, a pandemic trumps the Constitution, yeah?
Okie dokie.
What court was this decision in and what are the further legal actions the plaintiffs can take?
Wow. The SCOTUS ruled in favor of eugenics once?
Scary
This gross iniquity will have to be answered for.
This is what makes lawful people revolt and dealcwith their tyrants. And their little minions ‘just following orders’.
It sure dam better, anyways.
Thanks for posting just shows what we are up against
very interesting. This will be relevant when mandatory vaccinations occur soon enough...
So the Governor of Michigan will cause harm to people to which Covid 19 does not pose a risk.
Go Gretchen you botoxed shiny faced hack.
Thanks. Fascinating!
See here for details about the Michigan case:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3840292/posts
(I should have included that in my post)
what is the name of the judge
As always, who appointed this judge?
A social-communist will always support another social-communist.
Some time ago the SCOTUS got the idea it’s function was to make the law not rule on it.
The original decision outlined limits to forced vaccination (and, by extension, other violations of liberty); e.g., persons for whom the vaccination poses a health risk.
Subsequent decisions (not necessarily by the Supreme Court) developed an equal protection test.
Obviously, there comes a point at which violations of liberty are not allowed because of imminent threats to the general public as in the case of military invasion and contagious disease. In the present case, the CDC’s guidance provide a refutable presumption as to when the threat of coronavirus allows and does not allow suspension of liberty.
To this I would add the voice of the people expressed through the legislature. While the Governor has certain authority, so does the legislature. See Associate Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion Youngstown Sheet & Tube.
The judge graduated from Hillsdale College. That’s interesting.
Judge Christopher M. Murray. He's a state court judge, so not appointed by anyone we would know like a federal court judge would be. He graduated from Hillsdale College, so one would think he would be fairly conservative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.