JAMA 100 Years Ago Section Editor: Jennifer
Reiling, Assistant Editor.
One of the stock arguments of the antivaccinationists has been that
compulsory vaccination is contrary to the Constitution of the United States.
They have prated of “personal liberty,” and have made dire threats
of what they would do. In some states, weak-kneed courts have encouraged them
in their delusions at the expense of public health and at the cost of the
lives of the innocent. In Massachusetts especially they have fought compulsory
vaccination, finally carrying the fight to the highest tribunal. And they
have lost! February 20 the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking through
Mr. Justice Harlan, held the Massachusetts compulsory vaccination law to be
constitutional on the ground that in the protection of the health of the community
compulsory vaccination may be exercised by the state as a police regulation.
So those boards of health that have been timid in the past may now take courage.
Proper state legislation for the abolishment of smallpox is made possible
without any fear as to the constitutionality of such action.
COMPULSORY VACCINATION CONSTITUTIONAL. JAMA. 2005;293(8):926. doi:10.1001/jama.293.8.926-b
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: