Facts—The superintendent of the State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble Minded in the state of Virginia ordered an operation upon Carrie Buck, the plaintiff in error, for the purpose of sterilizing her. She contended that the Virginia statute authorizing the operation was void under the Fourteenth Amendment as denying to her due process of law and the equal protection of the laws. The evidence in this case showed that Carrie Buck’s mother was feeble-minded, that Carrie Buck was feeble-minded, and that she had a child that was feeble-minded. All of them were committed to the State Colony. Under the procedure of the law, the rights of the patient were most carefully considered, and every step, as in this case, was taken in scrupulous compliance with the statute and after months of observation.
Question—Does the Virginia law permitting the sterilization of individuals believed to be feeble-minded violate the due process or equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Decision—No.
Reasons—J. Holmes (8–1). The Court reasoned that more than once the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. The Court said that it would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the state for these lesser sacrifices, in order to prevent the nation from being swamped with incompetence. “But, it is said, however it might be if this reasoning were applied generally, it fails when it is confined to the small number who are in the institutions named and is not applied to the multitudes outside. It is the usual last resort of constitutional arguments to point out shortcomings of the sort.” The Court answered that “the law does all that is needed when it 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.” So far as the operations enable those who otherwise must be kept confined to be returned to the world, and thus open the asylum to others, the equality aimed at will be more nearly reached.
J. Butler dissented without writing an opinion.
Note—Buck sanctioned a form of eugenics. Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942), as well as more decisions related to reproductive privacy, have deprived Buck of any constitutional strength.