September 9, 2021

RELAX ABOUT THE PUSH FOR VACCINE MANDATES. The Supreme Court said more than a hundred years ago in Jacobson v. Massachusetts that vaccine mandates are constitutional. Indeed, vaccine mandates might even improve your liberty. The idea that such rules could set a dangerous precedent is simply paranoid. As one of America’s most famous jurists once pointed out,

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.

Oh.

Well, crap.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): The Horrific Outcomes of the Jacobson Case You’re Using to Justify Biden’s Vaccine Mandates.

Plus: The Irrepressible Myth of Jacobson v. Massachusetts. “During the COVID-19 outbreak, Jacobson v. Massachusetts became the fountainhead for pandemic jurisprudence. Courts relied on this 1905 precedent to resolve disputes about religious freedom, abortion, gun rights, voting rights, the right to travel, and many other contexts. But Justice John Marshall Harlan’s decision was very narrow. It upheld the state’s power to impose a nominal fine on an unvaccinated person. No more, no less. Yet, judges now follow a variant of Jacobson that is far removed from the Lochner era decision.”

InstaPundit is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.