In view of the coronavirus pandemic and the fact that a coronavirus vaccine may be developed soon, I thought that it would be a great time to discuss the Jacobson v. Massachusetts Supreme Court case, which deals with forced vaccinations from the government.
It is the year 1902 and smallpox rages across the entire world. The mortality rate for smallpox is as high as 30% and the disease killed over 300 million people around the world from the early 1900s to the 1970s when the disease was finally eradicated thanks to vaccination programs from various governments and international organizations.
Despite this threat of smallpox, a man named Henning Jacobson decided that he didn’t want to be vaccinated. Why? Jacobson grew up in Sweden, where smallpox vaccinations were mandatory for young children. And he claimed that he suffered terrible side effects from the vaccination when he got it as a child. After his son also reported experiencing negative side effects from the smallpox vaccine, he decided that he would not be getting the vaccine again.
Unfortunately, the town of Cambridge, Mass., where Jacobson lived, was seeing a sharp rise in the number of smallpox cases in June. The state had already passed a law making it legal for cities to force citizens to get vaccinations in the interest of public health and safety. The city of Cambridge also imposed a fine of $150 in today’s currency for those who avoided vaccination. Also, because the vaccine didn’t last a lifetime, adults were required to get re-vaccinated as well. Since Jacobson refused to get vaccinated, the city fined him. (This was despite many of his neighbors dying from the disease.)
Jacobson sued, along with other “anti-vaxxers” of the time, in July, claiming that forced vaccination was a violation of his liberty and appeared in a local court. The court made him pay the fine, so Jacobson brought the case to the Massachusetts Supreme Court, but it sided with the city government. Thus, he appealed, and the case went to the Supreme Court of the United States.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in September of the same year. Jacobson and his defense brought up the Fourteenth Amendment, claiming that the mandatory vaccination law was in violation of his individual liberty and allowed the government more control over individuals’ behavior.
The Court announced their decision on Feb. 20, 1905, siding with the Massachusetts Government in a 7-2 majority decision. The Court stated that although individual liberties were important, the interest of public health and safety and the state’s obligation to eradicate the disease were more important. Because those who refused vaccinations were putting others’ lives at risk, the Court decided that it was entirely acceptable to force vaccinations. In addition, the Court held that mandatory vaccinations were not considered oppressive, as long as the vaccinations did not go far beyond what was reasonably required for public safety. The Court also made clear that those with certain health conditions could be exempt from mandatory vaccination, but reaffirmed that Jacobson was not able to prove that he fell into this category.
This Supreme Court decision was reaffirmed in Zucht v. King (1922), holding that schools could deny admission to students not meeting vaccination requirements.
Because of the “anti-vaccination” movement, this case may reappear in the future, when a coronavirus vaccination is widespread and mandatory vaccination is enforced throughout the country.
What are your thoughts on this case? Let us know in the comments down below.