This case was brought against the state of Oklahoma by a convicted Felon who faced sterilization under an Oklahoma Statute. The court reversed the order of sterilization stating that the sterilization was a violation of the man’s fourteenth amendment right to equal protection. Justice Jackson wrote a concurring opinion, which emphasized the constitutional gravity of the assumptions made by the statute. Namely, that the law had a eugenic purpose for which there was no scientific background. He also cautioned against using people, even criminals, for ‘biological experiments’ in order to prevent the birth of future criminals.
This case was brought against the state of Oklahoma by a convicted Felon who faced sterilization under an Oklahoma Statute. The court reversed the order of sterilization stating that the sterilization was a violation of the man’s fourteenth amendment right to equal protection. Justice Jackson wrote a concurring opinion, which emphasized the constitutional gravity of the assumptions made by the statute. Namely, that the law had a eugenic purpose for which there was no scientific background. He also cautioned against using people, even criminals, for ‘biological experiments’ in order to prevent the birth of future criminals.