Facts of the Case
Oklahoma's Criminal Sterilization Act of 1935 allowed the state to sterilize a person who had been convicted three or more times of crimes "amounting to felonies involving moral turpitude." After his third conviction, Skinner was determined to be a habitual offender and ordered to be sterilized. He argued that the law violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Questions
Did the Act violate the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusions
-
In an opinion written by William Orville Douglas, the unanimous Court held that the Act violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that certain crimes, such as embezzlement, were excluded from the Act’s jurisdiction without explanation or reason. Moreover, the Court reasoned that because of the social and biological implications of reproduction and the irreversibility of sterilization operations, compulsory sterilization laws should be subject to strict scrutiny.
In his concurrence, Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone stated that he disagreed with the majority opinion’s reliance on the Equal Protection Clause and instead cited the Due Process Clause to prevent Skinner from being sterilized.
Health Care Reform
Online Debate
Last Updated at 11:00 AM, Friday, October 27, 2009 The current debate about health care reform...
Abortion and the Courts
Online Debate
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, passed by...