Judgments

BUCK VS BELL : CASE SUMMARY

The Supreme Court held in Buck Vs Bell (1927) that Virginia Act was constitutional which provided for sterilization of mental defectives.

FACTS OF THE CASE

Carrie Buck was a feeble  minded woman. Her mother was also feeble minded. She was mother of an illegitimate child, who was also feeble minded. Carrie Buck was committed to Virginia Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded.

Virginia Act provided that the health of patient and the welfare of society may be promoted in certain cases by sterilization of mental defectives under careful safeguard. Sterilization had to be effected in males by vasectomy and in females by salpingectomy without serious pain or danger to health. The Act provided that Superintendent of certain institutions including the State Colony, shall be of opinion that it is for the best interests of the patients and of society that an inmate under his care should be sexually sterilized, he may have operation performed upon any patient afflicted with hereditary forms of insanity, imbecility, etc.

A detail procedure has been provided to prevent possible abuse. Superintendent has to file a Petition before the Board of Directors of concerned Hospital or State Colony. Right to be heard was given to the inmate or his/her guardian. Inmate has also right to appeal.

The Carrie Buck lost in the Trial Court. Her case was affirmed by Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. The matter finally reached to the Supreme Court.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Opinion of the Court was delivered by Justice Holmes.

It was contended that Virginia Statute was in violation of 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The Court observed that it had been seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices often not felt to be such by those concerned in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starved for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

It was also contended that it violates 14th Amendment as it applies only to those persons confined in institutions and not to those persons who are outside these institutions. This argument was also rejected by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court observed that the law does all that it can, indicates a policy, applies it to all within the lines, and seeks to bring within the lines all similarly situated so far and so fast as its means allow.

Judgment of Court of Appeal was confirmed by the Supreme Court.

IMPACT OF THE CASE

Buck Vs. Bells legitimized eugenic sterilization in Unites States. After this judgment  many States passed such laws. This judgment has been widely criticized. In Skinner Vs Oklahoma the Supreme Court declared punitive sterilization unconstitutional but Buck Vs. Bells has not directly been overruled.

____________________________________________

Mukesh Kumar Suman is an advocate and legal author based at Delhi. He regularly appears before various Judicial Forums including NCLT, NCLAT, High Courts and the Supreme Court. He can be approached at mukesh_suman@outlook.com or +91 9717864570.

Mukesh Kumar Suman

Mukesh Kumar Suman

Mukesh Kumar Suman is an advocate based at Delhi. He has rich experience in civil, criminal, commercial, arbitration and corporate insolvency matters. He regularly appears before District Courts, NCLT, NCLAT, High Court and the Supreme Court. He can be approached at mukesh_suman@outlook.com or +91 9717864570.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *