The Supreme Court Ruling That Led To 70,000 Forced Sterilizations | Buck v. Bell
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2024
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur
To learn more about this case: amzn.to/2tY5Ffa
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.us
Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Mr. Beat on Facebook: / iammrbeat
In episode 35 of Supreme Court Briefs, the state of Virginia passes a law saying that stupid or immoral people are not allowed to have kids and must be sterilized. A woman named Carrie Buck fights back. Yes, this all actually happened.
Produced by Matt Beat. All images and video used under fair use, original content, or found in the public domain. Music by Jermaine Hysten.
Photo credits:
Morgan Riley
Taber Andrew Bain
Susan in Cville
Ishi
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/...
Other sources used:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v....
www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/e...
exhibits.hsl.virginia.edu/euge...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...
Cohen, Adam (2016). Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck. New York, New York: Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1594204180.
www.facinghistory.org/resourc...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgini...
acluva.org/en/news/shameful-h...
www.encyclopediavirginia.org/...
inspire.redlands.edu/cgi/view...
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/...
Madison Heights, Virginia
September 10, 1924
Eugenics doctor Albert Sidney Priddy, the dude in charge of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded, requests to sterilize 18-year old patient Carrie Buck. According to Dr. Priddy, Buck had the mental age of a 9-year old, and argued that if she was allowed to have children, this would be dangerous for society. So just so we are clear here, he wanted to force her to go through a procedure so that she could never have kids because of her genetics.
Wait, hold up. Let’s go back a bit, because this story is even more messed up than this. So Carrie Buck was the daughter of Emma Buck, who previously was taken away by the state from Carrie and her siblings when Carrie was a kid. Virginia confined Emma to-you guessed it-the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded for prostitution, immorality...oh and having syphilis. So Carrie grew up with foster parents, who treated her like a slave. How did Carrie also end up at the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded? Her foster parents sent her there for hopelessly bad behavior, sleeping around, and “feeblemindedness.” I’m not joking. Also, they sent her there apparently as a result of being raped by her foster mother’s nephew. Again, I am not joking. Since Carrie Buck was declared mentally incompetent to raise her child, her now former foster parents ended up adopting the baby. At 7 months old, that baby, whose name was Vivian, would also be declared “feeble-minded.”
So anyway, back to Dr. Priddy trying to sterilize Carrie. He first wanted to make sure it was legal. I mean, the state had passed a law called the Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924, which allowed doctors to forcibly sterilize patients who supposedly had genetic traits that would be damaging to society if passed on to the next generation. However, the law had yet to be tested in the courts. So the board of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded got it to happen. After ordering Buck sterilized, the board appointed her a random dude named Robert Shelton to be her guardian. He was the guardian of several of the institution’s patients and got paid for doing it, by the way. Buck’s lawyer was a dude named Irving Whitehead, who was a eugenics fan who wanted the sterilization law. Oh, and apparently he was also on the board, helping request Buck’s sterilization. In fact, he was good friends with Albert Priddy and Aubrey Strode, who represented Priddy in court. There’s no conflict of interest there! Whitehead made no effort to challenge the accusations that Buck was feeble minded, of course.
Shelton appealed the sterilization to the Circuit Court of Amherst County, who agreed the sterilization should take place. Shelton appealed again to the Supreme Court of Virginia, who also agreed it should take place. So one more appeal to the Supreme Court. By this time, Priddy had died and his successor, Dr. John Bell, now represented the Virginia Colony.
0:00 Introduction
0:02 Supreme
1:42 Vivian
2:28 Irving Whitehead
2:42 Aubrey Strode
3:24 1. due process of the law
5:08 65,000 Americans
5:57 October 19, 1927
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
This case is absolutely horrifying.
Dang straight. So messed up.
Thanks for joining us tonight. I loved reading the back and forth between you and McCarthy. :)
Lol np. Hope I didn't hijack the convo too much.
EmperorTigerstar I agree with you percent 100🙁
That was a crime by the court. I can’t imagine what she’s been through for all of her life because of that unjust and inhuman ruling. I feel sorry for her.
So do I. Her story is such a tragedy.
It happened to many more people than just her
@@JenisTreasureNook Yes, but we were told her story in this video. So, it is not out of place to feel for this woman. Although, I take your point that this was not a one off event and that many more people were forced to be sterilized against their will. Not only in America but around the world and that many places STILL HAVE these laws on the books 😞
@@annakevlin8634 just wanted to make sure people knew this was done over and over for years here in Virginia and I am sure in so many other areas. Was truly just tragic that this happened
@@JenisTreasureNook Yes, I agree that is important for people to know.
It is still on the books in a lot of places today so it is still relevant today.
I think this court case is a reflection of the era. During this time period, Eugenics was a very popular idea, and wasn't even really challenged as morally wrong until the holocaust showed the extremes of it. To this day, we are living with the consequences of this ideology. Funny how the past comes back to haunt us. I don't think people realize just how influential decisions and ideologies are until they have since past.
This answer is great.
Just like one day we will be free from religion.
@@yuiop6611 Bro, the ONLY dissented was a catholic. Wtf are you talking about religion? Have you seen the video?
@@yuiop6611 Humans will always have some sort of religion. Now we have non-theist religion growing in the US. Just look at people like the branch covidians with their masks, the cult of global warming that fight carbon while also fighting nuclear power, or the wokies that believe any difference in outcome must be racism/sexism/islmaphobia/etc and must be remedied by force. These are the same personality types that believed in religion in the past and now pursue the 'holier than thou' policies while claiming 'trust the science' (without actually understanding the scientific method). They even have the original sin of being born white now called 'white guilt' that they must engage in rabid anti-racism to rid themselves of.
@@alexjones7845 Alex Jones lmao
This was easily the most disturbing and unbelievable Supreme Court decisions I've ever researched.
What was the worst Supreme Court decision in American history? Is it this one?
Mr. Beat I have to say Dred Scott is worse but it's not far behind
Michael Hill Oh yah that one was terrible
These sterilizations still go on today, just not with prisoners who can not be reformed and are doing life. They still get conjugal visits producing children even though their miss wired brains can be passes on to their children.
While not the worst and harder to judge due to it being modern, the Citizens United decision and Buckly are both awful supreme Court decisions
Well you can't overturn it. If you do, roe v. Wade can be overturned.
That was one of the most messed up decisions in the history of the Court, in my humble opinion (for what it was worth).
Zachary Clark Absolutely. The 4 cases that I think everyone, regardless of political ideology, can agree are among the worst in American history are Dred Scott v Sanford, Plessy v Ferguson, Buck v Bell, and Korematsu v US.
The horrible four, I have to agree again with you Michael
+Michael Hill I would even argue Marbury v Madison was a horrible decision. It gave the Court extreme powers that were not given to them by the Constitution. The fact that the Court has mostly been dominated by wealthy ultra conservatives has led to many horrible decisions, even to this day.
Captain Sum Ting Wong Not touching the last part but I disagree about Marbury. The Framers knew that judicial review would be part of the courts' jurisdiction. It was one of the things the anti-feds were concerned about and that Alexander Hamilton responded to in Federalist 78. What good does their job in the Constitution to interpret the laws do if that check on the legislature has no teeth and the judiciary can only yell into the wind?
That an really the counter argument is that the Supreme Court isn't the final say on the law necessarily via jury nulification. Now that opens up a whole new can of worms but if people are so motivated that is where it can go.
Wow! That's so messed up! It's great to shine a light on the mistakes made in the Supreme Court as much as it is to highlight the positive rulings. Keep up the great work, Mr. Beat!
Thanks Andrew! I guess I've been just do dang positive with the Supreme Court overall haha
Yeah, this case is just sad. Shame that it isn't as well known as other SCOTUS mistakes like Dred Scott and Plessy although those 2 cases had much more of an impact on Am history so it makes sense why.
I disagree. This case has had a huge impact on the history of USA. We don't know it as well because the people it directly effected don't have anyone to fight for their remembrance.
Due what this decision allowed.
I lost some respect for President Taft today...
Yeah he done messed up with this one.
Jacob Luna he got stuck in a bathtub anyway
@@DarthCookieKS No actual evidence of it happening. It’s an urban legend.
@@Quinntus79 too bad
@@Quinntus79 It probably happened but they didn’t have a smartphone camera that recorded almost everything very easily.
I have never been called feeble-minded but I have been called unintelligent by classmates before. I was not strong in math and had teachers who focused on the subject far more than any of the others and it gave me headaches because it was so confusing. I dreaded going to school because it was so hard to understand and kids made fun of me for my awful test scores. (I remember once getting 4/43 on a quiz.) However, I eventually got a lot better at the subject and even took some types of math that many students think are too hard. Anyway, this supreme court case is terrible. I would be extremely angry if someone prevented me from ever having kids because they believed I was "feeble-minded." This Supreme Court Case reminds me of learning about a woman named Nellie McClung in school. She was a women's rights activist in the early 20th century but she also supported the sterilization of "mental defectives." I guess this shows that some historical figures did some good things while they also did or wanted to do some pretty awful things. Overall, I think the obsession some people of that time had with sterilization should be brought up more. I can not believe I did not anything about it until last year.
I'm sorry you were bullied by classmates. Math wouldn't even be a thing if it weren't for social studies. I never heard of Nellie McClung, but I am not surprised that such a forward-thinking person of the Progressive Era would be a fan of eugenics. Many progressives of the time fell into that camp. They just were ignorant of the implications, much like we are ignorant of the implications of much of what we do today. Glad math is going better for you these days. Way to persevere!
Lots of people are bad at math.
It's a good day when Mr. Beat uploads, but this was a rather disturbing case.
I was actually misdiagnosed as "mentally retarded" as a kid by so-called psychiatrists solely due to my speech impairment.
So Buck v. Bell is very disturbing to me in multiple ways.
Pretty sad that even Kansas had an eugenics law on the books with the last such sterilization performed in the 1950s.
It took the American Psychiatric Association until 2013 to change "mental retardation" to "intellectual disability" within the DSM-5. MR has NOT been an acceptable medical term for many years prior to 2013, but still was used to describe me in the late 70s through early 80s. To say that it was acceptable is complete rubbish.
Calling it retardation or an intellectual disability seems like semantics
man I feel sorry for u,I hope everything going well since then
@@LeRealJawz thank you for asking. Yes, I’m doing well.
Unfortunately, this sort of stuff still happens today to many other people (even 40+ years later).
One of the darker times of American history.
A lot of crazy things happened in the '20s that most don't know about.
I did a book review on "Imbeciles" for a class assignment a few months ago. The book goes in-depth on this entire case. It is chilling to read because this could very well happen again. A lot of noble Americans sided with the eugenics movement. What a sad time in American history. It is a period we often ignore and most people do not know it even happened.
I kind of wish I had this video for sparknotes a few months ago haha. Great video, Mr. Beat! Keep up the good work.
Oh wow. I actually read parts of that book to research for this video. That's cool you've read it, too. I think Carrie Buck's story is another example of how non-fiction is often more absurd than fiction. And yes, it could happen again. This is one reason why I try to teach this stuff. Good to hear from you.
NateTheGreat reminds of current times, also lots of movements that are supported by famous people and will be seen as shocking in the future
It is a great reminder of that phrase - the road to hell is paved with good intentions! I know the phrase doesn't really refer to this context, but it's important to remember that many people who did awful things, when viewed in retrospect, thought they had the very best of intentions!
Pierce Butler was my great-great-grandfather, it was always fun talking about this court case in history class in HS. Great video Mr. Beat!
Wow! He was my great grandfather
I am from Lynchburg Virginia and I actually have a lot of family who has worked at that facility over the years. Adolf Hitler actually wrote a letter to the facility commending them on their work in the eugenics field. After this along with it being used as a defense during the nuremberg trails, the hospital changed its name to “Central Virginia Training Center” around 1953. It is actually set to be closed in the next year. It only has a few dozen handicapped patients. It’s actually really creepy there. All the builds are abandoned and falling apart.
The problem with eugenics is that it has no limit. My rights could be violated for having a minor learning disability. Once society goes into the business of creating "perfect" citizens, it won't stop.
honestly it should have never been overturned. great decision, sad to see its no longer possible
Just when you thought it couldn't get more terrible 6:20 happens and Dorris Figgins is unknowingly sterilized. HOW WAS THAT LEGAL
Researching this case I just kept thinking "wait, there's MORE?!?"
It happened to many
Wow. Going in for a life-saving surgery & coming out unknowingly sterilized (perfectly legal too) is beyond scary af.
It is messed up how they forced her to be sterilized.
But I find it maybe a glint of beauty how she found love twice. She loved books and reading, was nice to everyone. At least she was respected in that sense.
Do Skinner v. Oklahoma next. It will be an interesting sequel.
Yeah, I will definitely do that one eventually.
Wow, this case was so messed up
Beyond messed up. I try not to interject my opinion in these cases but I couldn't help myself on this one.
Thank you for covering this important piece of disability history!
I've never been called feeble minded, but I am auti stic, putting a space there because recently UA-cam has been flagging my comments that use that word, and I have ADHD. I was bullied quite a bit as a bit in first grade, although it wouldn't be until a few years later into I got a diagnosed with anything. Bullying people because their begin world differently from other people is wrong and thinking about this case makes me sick, especially since very few people ever talk about it. If we don't talk about cases like this how are we supposed to prevent them from happening.
While nothing to this extreme is happening right now, people with disabilities are still mistreated. We have high unemployment rates, people in institutions sometimes have very little say in how they live their lives, and our lives are often presented as tragedies. People with intellectual or development disability are especially subjected to this. We deserve better
It still stands!!! Holy jeez. Great ep. Mr. Beat!
The League of Taste & Class Corp. To be fair, the only reason it still stands is likely that no state, thank God, has tried something similar. If they did, it would likely be overturned but SCOTUS can only revisit rulings if a case comes up that is seen as related in some way
Thanks for the info! :)
Yeah, Michael's correct, but still...
@Michael Hill - This is true but my major worry is that the Supreme Court isn't perfect. They have made bad decisions in the past and they can still make them in the future. I would mostly agree with you that it likely would be shout down but at the same time worried. Especially if the case presented itself as sterilization for criminals and the case above being used as precedence. When you have a group like that which is universally reviled by society the Supreme Court has a nasty habit of not caring near as much about their civil liberties.
sunnycorax, I see this happening if a challenge to a law requiring chemical sterilization of sex offenders gets to the Supreme Court. Watch for that in the coming years.
I grew up my entire life in Amherst County VA, did 12 years of public school there and it’s pretty indicative that this was a poor decision the nation isn’t proud of because I didn’t learn anything about this in school. There may have been a mention of it from my US/VA history teacher in 11th grade but yeah, I didn’t REALLY learn about this until after graduating high school. I clicked on the video because I knew it’d mention my hometown haha. It really is sickening though. Fun fact, the building for epileptics and feebleminded is now called the “Central Virginia Training Center”
While I do believe people who have serious inheritable conditions have a moral obligation to not have children, making it a legal obligation is incredibly dangerous and can very easily be used for the advancement of authoritarian goals
The problem is that, "people who have serious inheritable conditions" don't always think they or understand that they, "have a moral obligation to not have children". This is going to be a very unpopular opinion, but I think that the court case had some basis in truth. Obviously, it would be a case-by-case, individual circumstance, but I can understand the thinking behind it. It wouldn't prevent the individual from having sex, just reproducing. As a personal experience, my step family has a father and mother, who were both mentally impaired, that were warned that if they had children the children would be be born the same way. They ended up having six kids all worse than the one before. The taxpayers have to support these children, and will have to take over fulltime after the parents die. Granted, the children could've turned out perfectly fine, like the woman in this video, but there is also a greater chance that they won't.
Man, that's just messed up. Let people have kids if they want. Wtf Virginia?
And the 29 other states around the same time! :(
My old aunt seriously wants poor people to be sterilized because she thinks they're having too many kids and having them simply to "collect more welfare". It's disgusting.
Captain Sum Ting Wong Yikes. Seriously?
That’s why I’m pro-choice
Don’t force people to sterilize if they want children
Damn I never even knew about this case. Very disappointed in my boys Taft and Brandeis.
Yeah, a lot of Progressives drank the eugenics Koolaid unfortunately
Mr. Beat progressives usually drink up whatever ideology is trendy koolaid
@@jamessheerin121 and?
@@iammrbeat I know that Theodore Roosevelt supported it as well as Alexander Graham Bell. I hope the Supreme Court overturns Buck v. Bell via obiter dictum if they ever get a chance too in the future.
This is a really amazing video how you used the visuals, etc. Thumbs up.
Thanks for the video helped a lot. I had a packet to read but I had trouble understanding it so this helped a lot.
I guess if I can't understand this I have no chance of becoming a lawyer.
Sara Wilcker I think it is better if u became a lawyer without understanding that, because it was stupid.
If you can't understand this, that actually means you'll be a great lawyer.
To the sterilization you go! /s
Technically Buck v. Bell is still valid and the subsequent Skinner v. Oklahoma is based on what crime you committed, and why state is doing so (which can be legally vague)
It was when Allied successfully painted Nazi German as the most evil there is ever evil then the society were also agree that Holocaust (and the related eugenic question) is evil too, only then we stop chopping people's Fallopian.
@@chongjunxiang3002 While it's still valid and weakened by Skinner v. Oklahoma, the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 is probably what made it much weaker since it helps protect Americans with Disablities (including mental) from harsh treatment like sterilizations, from institutions.
Easily disturbing and tragic. My heart and soul just ache for Carrie Buck
Just had to read the book Imbeciles for one of my college classes. I already knew about the case because I'm from Virginia and I'm a big history geek but it went into great detail especially about the people involved. I highly recommend the book.
No, but in fact, I had to struggle to get a diagnoses for Asperger Syndrome for that I wasn't feeble minded or had a low IQ of any form. I had a psychiatrist who denied the idea of the diagnoses because with an average IQ he thought I was too smart to have Asperger Syndrome (which in fact I did had Asperger Syndrome despite his claim).
Imagine working your life to be a Supreme Court judge and your presented with this case
The worst part about this ruling is it has never been technically overturned. Luckily society has decided, rightfully, that eugenics is a horribad idea and we shouldn't do it, but if it does every come up again or something like a criminal being punished with being sterilized the president still exists. I would like to hope we are at the point that it would be clean swept out 9-0 if a case came up but the Supreme Court has more than its fair share of poor choices so...yeah. I guess the right phrase would be "trust but verify."
Also sidebar I've never really cared for Oliver Wendell Holmes that much or really any of his opinions.
I believe it was you who actually first suggested that I cover this case. I'm sorry it took so long.
Yeah I do recall putting in the suggestion. You did a really good job of going over all the parts of the case. I'm not too worried though that it took you awhile to cover it. There are quite a few cases that you did I hadn't even heard of so I appreciate the show as a whole. It's always a good listen.
This is the most disturbing thing I’ve watched.
0:087
"Eugenics doctor..."
_Eugenics doctor_
*_Eugenics_*
Oh god
Used to be a legitimate profession, sadly.
Great video as always Mr. Beat. Could you please cover Flores v. Reno? Given recent events, it would be great if we got a better understanding of that case.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Brilliantly put together.... Englightened on the area of forced child care ( children taken from their biological parents )and abused by the state. Your on topic. We look forward to listening and sharing your new videos.
Wait, they called the baby promiscuous? Did I miss hear that?
Every is equal! Great video Mr Beat!
I live 10 minutes from Madison Heights, I lived in Madison Heights as a kid. I went to private school and my brother went through public school. Neither of us were taught about this and I think I only slightly knew about it from another video but it didnt say it was in VA. Crazy that something so local isnt taught in school. Thanks for another great video!
Not really sure how the descendent of victims of sterilization are supposed to collect their money.
This has been my least favorite Supreme Court case for the past few years. Thank you for this video.
Also, screw Oliver Wendel Holmes Jr.
Yeah, Holmes does not do himself a favor being on the right side of history in this one. Little did he know, I suppose.
@@iammrbeat Has he EVER been on the right side of history? I really hope he gets on the worst supreme court justices of all time video, at least as an honorable mention.
@@night6724 You're a Frenchman.
Your opinions are invalid.
Great information! Subbed!
This sounds like something straight out of a movie.
That was really sad, and touching. The fact that America has such a dark history really saddens me. I am glad that we are finally growing and coming away from all this darkness, or were. Now I feel we are being led down a darker path towards Nationalism. I will say this. Nobody should be able to tell someone that they can or can't reproduce. Secondly eugenics is immoral and disgusting. The fact this law hasn't been overturned is ridiculous. Thank you for sharing this with people and shining a light on our dark past as a nation. Keep making these great videos Mr. Beat I will always watch and share them.
To be fair it was never overturned because there hasn't been any relevant issue regarding sterilzation today that would make the court look at that. I think if it was brought up today, it would no doubt be overturned.
However the Americans with Disablites Act of 1990 I believe, is probably the best weapon we have in regards to law to protect the mentally disabled people we have in our country. So while it hasn't been overturned, there is no need to for a couple of reasons. One: It's extremely unpopular and unethical to sterilize anyone for mental illness in this day in age, so no medical facility will do such a thing, and two like I said the ADA.
I think the case might be overturned if it got looked on today. However there seems not to be a need since there’s the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
I don't think any Supreme Court after 1945 would uphold this ruling
@@selfloathinggameing Nope. It’s likely out the window even with this court that we have now.
I can see only two of the Trump appointed judges (Barrett and Kavanugh) dissenting to overturn Buck v Bell though.
and the 14th amendment
I think this is very much a product of its time. In the 1920's Eugenics was considered hard science. It wasn't really controversial. This is a pre-WWII trial as well where the horrors of eugenics and mass genocide hadn't really been fully pondered or understood. While it's a bad decision, I wonder if something similar couldn't happen today based on things we think are presently scientifically accurate that in the future we may find are not so. I mean, there are still people who believe vaccines cause autism even though the science has not found any evidence to support that opinion. Eugenics was even more widely accepted! So, if I were on the court in the 20's, I may very well have been persuaded by the doctors as well given the scientific knowledge of the time and the common beliefs about genetics and feeble-mindedness that were held by people of the time and era.
You make a really good point. We like to assume that science linearly progresses forward, but often it leads us to make giant societal steps backward. I always think about how in 50 years we are going to seem so backward. Especially with all this petty division that social media is magnifying right now. We still have a long ways to go.
This is true, but it is quite disturbing to realize how far Eugenics got in terms of popularity in the first half of the 20th century. It was only considered horrific when it was applied to people who were considered "white" en masse -- e.g., a large population of a white-passing ethnicity. People were happy to accept Eugenics in the first 4 decades of the 20th century because they felt it largely justified white supremacy and global domination. So saying "this case is a product of its time" is like saying, "Well, who knew racism and colonialism was a bad thing?" Um, ... all the people suffering under the institution of racism and colonialism who spoke out against it?
It's important to recognize that our values have changed over time, but let's not pretend that no one at that time found fault with Eugenics. And that popularity should not dictate morality, or subsequently, any judgment of it.
We still have anti incest laws and generally we still prioritize a child's "best interests", whatever that means. At the time, the justices were presented with supposedly 3 generations of imbeciles and a consensus that it was heritable, it could be argued that no reasonable person would consent to be born that way. And today we still have fucked up conservatorship laws that can apply to anyone that seem even slightly mentally ill without much due process and can last for eternity.
Wow, that's madness
Unbelievable
Whats more insane is its still technically upheld
Thank you, from korea
i'm a student studying criminology :)
Mr Beat 2020!!!!! LETS GO YEET EM PATTY MY BOI
this was cray cray!
I have to make a presentation and present it to my class tmr, this is so disturbing
I just read about this in Siddhartha Mukherjee's book The Gene. How the fuck did we not talk about this in US classes
The "it lowers poverty and crime rates" seems eerily familiar 🤔
I want to hear more about Skinner v Oklahoma.
Hey Mr. Beat, why not do Skinner v. Oklahoma? I feel like it is an intriguing case.
This is the topic I chose to write my research paper abt (I’m in college) and I find this so crazy
This is perhaps the most disturbing thing I have ever heard of. I was not aware of this and it furthers my hatred of government interference in the lives of individuals. I am glad you brought this to the attention of so many. I think this nation's politics are just as bad now as they were then. The individual choice of a person must be a fundamental right!
With what is happening right now this case should defiantly be on people's minds.
History can get very dark.
President During that time: Calvin Coolidge
Chief Justice: William Howard Taft
Argued April 22, 1927
Decided May 2, 1927
Case Duration: 10 Days
Decision: 8-1 in favor of Buck
that picture is terrifying 1 minute 43 seconds.
While no case will ever be as bad as the Dread Scott case, this is one of the few contenders for number two alongside Korematsu. A sober reminder that terrible supreme court decisions are nothing new
7:03 Taft wtf are you doing?
I think this case is similar to Plessy V Ferguson in that the effects were very bad but the rationale for the decision somewhat made sense.
both rulings were disgusting.
Do the skinner one or Nintendo one next.
You should do the insular cases!
Holy crap! That's a great idea. How is it you're the first to suggest this?!?
Why have I never heard of this case?
Eugenics. The atrocity everyone forgot about, because everyone is an awful person.
Thanks Mr. Beat for being an exception
Do Nintendo v. Universal
It was a court case over the name Donkey Kong
It wasn't a Supreme Court case, though. :/
Mr. Beat Oh. Thanks for the response though. A lot of UA-camrs don't do that
Wait, what the fuck? Seriously, what the fuck? Honestly, it seems like no one in this case (other than Buck) gave much thought to it.
Wow, just wow.
Also worth noting that former President Taft was on the Supreme Court during this time.
I've only ever been called "stupid" by persons who know from internal experience whereof they speak, so it's all good.
The idea of eugenics is absolutely horrific, and goes against common human decency. The fact that it's even considered a 'debate' scares me.
this is just messed up
Indeed. :(
2:21 Robert Shelton....oh shit.....
Look, I just found out about this playlist yesterday and I've watched probably about 40 videos. And of all the cases this one is by far the worst. A lot of these cases go 5 to 4, but this one went 8 to 1. That alone is mind boggling 😵💫😵🥴
nah roe v wade was the worst
How can you still believe you have rights after seeing so many of these ruling?
New subscriber
Holy crap!
Indeed
what the buck that really sucks
I am shook
I liked the bell in the profile picture.
The notification bell?
Mr. Beat No, the bell that you had in your profile picture for some time.
That's Priddy horrible.
Honestly.
This is a horrific situation most people agree stupid people shouldn’t have kids can’t raise them right or people with horrible disorders and can be passed down should consider not but forcing them the infringement of liberty is what makes this case so interesting and horrifying taking a conclusion to its extreme
TBH I think this case is WAY worse then Scott V. Sanford because I’m one of the people they would call “feeble minded” & to have “unwanted genetic traits for society” & because at least Scott v. Sanford was overturned so it’s no longer a threat, this case never was & is still a threat to this day. usually I don’t get scared as a matter of fact I love horror but easily but this case was genuinely horrifying & legitimately terrified me because they actually sterilized people just for unwanted genetic traits without even informing them about it, if they were gonna do that to me I would rather die then be forcefully sterilized. Sorry for the long comment I usually do that but I jus twanged to get out my frustration with this case but it’s not your fault Mr. Beat you were just stating facts you did a great job man keep up the great work. I was pissed off about what happened in this case!!
Wow.
You can see William Howard Taft with the justices
The Dred Scott Decision would have to be the worst.
I came here after stumbling into her story. My God this country has done some wicked awful things. OMG!
This remains the most disturbing Supreme Court case I've come across only next to the Dred Scott Decision.
@@iammrbeat I just watched that one. I learned about his case in law school somehow her case wasn’t on the “list”. Thanks for sharing.
The worst decision has not yet been made, but it will be a loulou!
With Virginia's present position of extreme late-term abortion, and even post-birth execution, aren't they right back in 1924 again?
This is very disturbing.
Indeed
Yay Butler!
WHAT THE HECK VIRGINIA!!! I'm so glad our state got away from you!