AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mariner, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, L. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mariner, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, L. H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Ethics
Right arrow Health Law
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Immunization/Vaccines
Right arrow Public Health Practice
Right arrow Government
April 2005, Vol 95, No. 4 | American Journal of Public Health 581-590
© 2005 American Public Health Association
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.055160

GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, AND LAW

Jacobson v Massachusetts: It’s Not Your Great-Great-Grandfather’s Public Health Law

Wendy K. Mariner, JD, LLM, MPH, George J. Annas, JD, MPH and Leonard H. Glantz, JD

The authors are with the Department of Health Law, Bioethics and Human Rights, School of Public Health, School of Law, and School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, Mass.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Wendy K. Mariner, JD, LLM, MPH, Boston University, 715 Albany St, Boston, MA 02218 (e-mail: wmariner{at}bu.edu).

Jacobson v Massachusetts, a 1905 US Supreme Court decision, raised questions about the power of state government to protect the public’s health and the Constitution’s protection of personal liberty. We examined conceptions about state power and personal liberty in Jacobson and later cases that expanded, superseded, or even ignored those ideas.

Public health and constitutional law have evolved to better protect both health and human rights. States’ sovereign power to make laws of all kinds has not changed in the past century. What has changed is the Court’s recognition of the importance of individual liberty and how it limits that power. Preserving the public’s health in the 21st century requires preserving respect for personal liberty.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
D. R. Buchanan
Autonomy, Paternalism, and Justice: Ethical Priorities in Public Health
Am J Public Health, January 1, 2008; 98(1): 15 - 21.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
G. J. Annas
The Supreme Court and Abortion Rights
N. Engl. J. Med., May 24, 2007; 356(21): 2201 - 2207.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
J. Colgrove and R. Bayer
Manifold Restraints: Liberty, Public Health, and the Legacy of Jacobson v Massachusetts
Am J Public Health, April 1, 2005; 95(4): 571 - 576.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Public Health Association