Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:46:29.456Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justice Red in Tooth and Claw: A Review of Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell by Paul A. Lombardo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

John G. Browning
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , Fall 2009 , pp. 519 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Lombardo, P., Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008): at 246–247.Google Scholar
Id., at 278.Google Scholar
Lombardo, P. A., “Eugenical Sterilization in Virginia: Aubrey Strode and the Case of Buck v. Bell,“University of Virginia (University of Virginia, Ph.D. dissertation, 1982); “Involuntary Sterilization in Virginia: From Buck v. Bell to Poe v. Lynchburg,” Developments in Mental Health Law 3 (1983): at 13-21; “Settlement of Poe v. Lynchburg Ends Sterilization Era,” Developments in Mental Health Law 5 (1984): at 18; “Three Generations, No Imbeciles; New Light on Buck v. Bell”, New York University Law Review 60 (1985): at 30-62; “Miscegenation, Eugenics, and Racism: Historical Footnotes to Loving v. Virginia”, University of California at Davis Law Review 21 (1988): at 421–452; “Medicine, Eugenics, and the Supreme Court: From Coercive Sterilization to Reproductive Freedom”, Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 13 (1996): at 1-25; “Pedigrees, Propaganda, Paranoia: Family Studies in Historical Context”, Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 21 (2001): at 247-255; “Carrie Buck's Pedigree”, Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine 138 (2001): at 278-282; “The American Breed: Nazi Eugenics and the Origin of the Pioneer Fund”, Albany Law Review 65 (2002): at 743-830; “Taking Eugenics Seriously: Three Generations of ??? Are Enough?” Florida State University Law Review 30 (2002): at 191-218; “Facing Carrie Buck”, Hastings Center Report 33 (2003): at 14-17; and, with Door, G. M., “Eugenics, Medical Education, and the Public Health Service: Another Perspective on Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment”, Bulletin of the History of Medicine 80 (2006): at 291-316.Google Scholar
See, for example, Black, E., War against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race (New York: Four Walls, Eight Windows, 2003).Google Scholar
Smith v. Board of Examiners of Feeble-minded, 88 A. 963, 965 (W.J. 1913).Google Scholar
See Lombardo, , supra note 1, at 293–294.Google Scholar
Sheldon Novick's otherwise fine Honorable Justice: The Life of Oliver Wendell Holmes is one such example, in which Carrie Buck barely rates a footnote.Google Scholar
Black's, Edwin War against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race falls into this category. Buck is usually with the decision in Dred Scott, the “separate but equal” ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson, and the Korematsu case upholding the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans in discussions of the court's low points.Google Scholar
See, for example, Novick, S. M., Honorable Justice: The Life of Oliver Wendell Holmes (Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1989); and Black, supra note 4.Google Scholar
See Lombardo, , supra note 1.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., Speeches (Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1934): at 101.Google Scholar
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. at 207 (1927).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., “Letter of May 19, 1927”, in Peabody, J., ed., The Holmes-Einstein Letters: Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and Lewis Einstein 1903–1935 (New York: MacMillan, 1964): at 267.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., “Letter of April 29, 1927”, in Howe, M. D., ed., Holmes-Laski Letters: The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and Harold J. Laski 1916–1935 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1953): at 938.Google Scholar
Id., at 941.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., “Gas-Stokers' Strike”, American Law Review 7 (1873): 582.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., “Letter of May 12, 1927”, in Howe, M. D., ed., Holmes-Laski Letters: The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and Harold J. Laski 1916 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1953): at 942.Google Scholar
Holmes, O. W., “Letter of July 21, 1925”, Tien Hsia Monthly (October 1935), at 251.Google Scholar
That suit, Poe v. Lynchburg Training School and Hospital, 518 F. Supp. 789 (W.D. Va 1981), (the successor to the Virginia Colony), would seek not money damages, but a declaration that Virginia's sterilizations had been unconstitutional and that the state notify all those who had been sterilized.Google Scholar
Vaughn v. Ruoff, 253 F.2d 1124 at 1129 (8th Cir. 2001).Google Scholar
See Lombardo, , supra note 1, at 278.Google Scholar
Dalesio, E. P., “N.C. Eugenics Victims Could Begin Getting Compensation”, June 24, 2009, available at <http://hamptonroads.com/2009/> (last visited June 24, 2009).+(last+visited+June+24,+2009).>Google Scholar