Buck v Bell was a 1927 decision of the Supreme Court of the United States upholding a Virginia statute that authorized the compulsory sterilization of people confined to state institutions and deemed unfit to reproduce. Writing for an eight to one majority upholding the sterilization of Carrie Buck, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote that three generations of imbeciles are enough. The ruling gave legal cover to a wave of forced sterilizations across the United States that eventually reached an estimated 60,000 or more people, and it was cited by lawyers defending Nazi Germany's own compulsory sterilization program at the Nuremberg trials. Buck v Bell has never been formally overruled, but it is widely repudiated as one of the Supreme Court's most discredited decisions; Virginia issued a formal apology for the case in 2002.
Facts
Decision Year Decision Date HoldingBuck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2 Current StatusDespite changing attitudes about sterilization, the Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell. 2 Case Status
Case Status (category)Controversial / Debated 1 Connections
Authored By
Majority opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., containing the phrase "three generations of imbeciles are enough."
Decided By
Decided by the United States Supreme Court, 1927.
In Legal System
Matches the existing Griswold v Connecticut precedent for US Supreme Court rulings on this atlas.
In the Other Atlases
Found In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject is found.
Source Buck v Bell (Wikipedia)Lead sentence 2tier 2Quote, Lead sentence 2
Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Sources
1. Wikidata: Buck v Bell
Source: never expressly overturned but 'distinguished out of existence' and widely criticized/weakened by later case lawView the Source 2. Buck v Bell (Wikipedia)
WikipediaWikipedia infobox, Decided field
Decided May 2, 1927
Wikipedia infobox, Decided field (year)
Decided May 2, 1927
Wikipedia lead paragraph, first sentence
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Wikipedia lead paragraph, current-status sentence
Despite changing attitudes about sterilization, the Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell.
In Group: Privacy, Reproduction and Personal Autonomy Cases, Introduction, sentences 1-3
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
View the Source Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.