User:TrevorOSmith/sandbox

Supreme Court case
'In 1918, Harry H. Laughlin was the acting superintendent of the Eugenics Records Office. Laughlin had made many pushes for eugenics research and results to be accepted not only on an academic basis but also among the population of the United States. In 1922, Laughlin had published a paper which even included a draft of laws which states and countries should adopt if they wanted to implement the Eugenic and sterilization legislation that he fought for. ' Virginia's General Assembly passed the Eugenical Sterilization Act in 1924. According to American historian Paul A. Lombardo, politicians wrote the law to benefit a malpracticing doctor avoiding lawsuits from patients that were the victims of forced sterilization. Eugenicists used Buck to legitimize this law in the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell through which they sought to gain legal permission for Virginia to sterilize Buck. 'In 1910, as a result of Eugenics research starting to be pushed in America, the Virginia Colony for the Epileptic and Feebleminded was created. Often called “The Colony” or “The Lynchburg Colony” (on account of it being located in Lynchburg, VA), the Virginia Colony for the Epileptic and Feebleminded was expanded under the control of acting superintendent Albert Priddy to be allowed to house those of the population that were deemed “feebleminded”. Four years after The Colony’s opening, Albert Priddy had submitted a proposal to the state legislature for sterilization of those deemed too “feebleminded” within The Colony. In 1924, the Virginia Eugenical Sterilization Act was passed--the policy was based, of course, on Laughlin’s drafts of laws for sterilization. Carrie Buck was selected by The Colony as the first person to be sterilized under the justification of this new law. Buck was chosen with the express intent of being a test case to challenge the law in court. The November after Buck was sterilized, the Virginia Eugenical Sterilization Act was challenged in the Circuit Court of Amherst County, Virginia. Buck’s lawyer, Irving Whitehead-- a known eugenicist and supporter of Priddy’s work--represented Buck during the five hour trial where he did not even rebuttal evidence provided nor call witnesses to the stand when Buck’s mental capabilities were called into question. '

In an eight to one decision, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924 did not violate the U.S. Constitution. 'The main justification for compulsory sterilization was the court case Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which made vaccination compulsory under the intent of the betterment of society. Likewise, the Supreme Court viewed compulsory sterilization as an action for the betterment of society based on the findings of eugenical research.' Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes made clear that the challenge was not upon the medical procedure involved, but on the process of the substantive law. The court was satisfied that the Virginia Sterilization Act complied with the requirements of due process since sterilization could not occur until a proper hearing had occurred at which the patient and a guardian could be present and the patient had the right to appeal the decision. They also found that since the procedure was limited to people housed in state institutions it did not deny the patient equal protection of the law. And finally, since the Virginia Sterilization Act was not a penal statute, the Court held that it did not violate the Eighth Amendment since it is not intended to be punitive. Citing the best interests of the state, Justice Holmes affirmed the value of a law like Virginia's in order to prevent the nation from being "swamped with incompetence." The Court accepted, without evidence, that Carrie and her mother were promiscuous and that the three generations of Bucks shared the genetic trait of feeblemindedness. Thus, it was in the state's best interest to have Carrie Buck sterilized. The decision was seen as a major victory for eugenicists.

Lastly, after the decision was made, I want to add into the last paragraph:


 * After the result of the Buck v. Bell case, Harry H. Laughlin was quoted with saying “the establishment of the eugenical authority of the state . . .[enabling] the prevention of hereditary degeneration by a method sound from the legal, eugenical and humanitarian points of view. . . . It is now possible for any state, if it desires to do so, to enact a sterilization statute.’’ The result of this being that many states began to adopt policies similar to that of the Virginia sterilization statute. One such state was California whose legislation for sterilization was the groundwork for the Nazi party’s own Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring.