[DoodleBob]

Jacobson v. Massachusetts did not uphold the state's power to mandate vaccinations.

"Jacobson, standing by itself, will not support a vaccine mandate. If the state or federal governments wish to forcibly vaccinate people, they will have to rely on Buck v. Bell. That anticanonical case upheld the state's power to forcibly perform medical procedures on people to promote the public good. Roe v. Wade favorably cited Buck to support this proposition. In Roe, Justice Blackmun contended, the state retains the authority to force a woman to maintain a pregnancy for, among other reasons, to "protect[] potential life." Justice Blackmun explained that "[t]he Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right" "to do with one's body as one pleases." To support this proposition, Justice Blackmun cited two cases, with one-word parentheticals: "Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 S.Ct. 358, 49 L.Ed. 643 (1905) (vaccination); Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 47 S.Ct. 584, 71 L.Ed. 1000 (1927) (sterilization)."

[MNJohnnie]

There is nothing that include the Federal Government in this role. it has always been strictly a state power. This attempt to re-write case history to say it does is false.

It also hangs on the differences between LEGISLATIVE and EXECUTIVE power.

The Executive cannot write law.

Did the Virginia statute which authorized sterilization deny Buck the right to due process of the law and the equal protection of the laws as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment?

[grey_whiskers]

Uh-huh.

Three Generations of Imbeciles is Enough.

Supreme Court Precedent for Mandatory Sterilization.

Let’s tell the black community that THAT’s what Biden really has in store for them, and then go make popcorn (corn pop?) and watch the show.