Ethics Case Jacobson v Massachusetts:

Fact: Jacobson lived in the city of Cambridge. Cambridge had a smallpox outbreak that seemed to be getting worse. The Cambridge Board of Health passed a regulation that require all adults to get the smallpox vaccination. The city provided the vaccinations for free. Jacobson refused to have the vaccinations. He appeared to be healthy at this time. He experienced a negative reaction to a vaccination as a child.

Issue: Must adult within Cambridge comply with the Board of Health's regulation to have a smallpox vaccination.

Holding: Yes, the vaccination requirement is constitutional.

Reasoning: Experts from the opinion of Mr. Justice Harlan: The authority of the State to enact this statute is... commonly called the police power- a power which the state did not surrender... under the Constitution... This court has distinctly recognized the authority of a State to enact quarantine laws and "health laws of every description". ... According to settled principles, the police power of a State must be held to embrace... such reasonable regulation... as will protect the public health and the public safety... It is equally true that the State may invest local bodies... with authority... to safeguard the public health and the public safety. The mode or manner in which those results are to be accomplished is within the discretion of the State, subject... to the condition that no rule prescribed by a State, nor any regulation adopted by a local government agency... shall... the Constitution of the United State or infringe any right granted or secured by that instrument,...

The defendant insists that his liberty is invaded when the State subjects him to fine or imprisionment for neglecting or refusing to submit to vaccination; that a compulsory vaccination law is unreasonable, arbitary and oppressive, and, ... hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best... but the liberty secured by the Constitution of the United State... does not import an absolute right in each person to be, at all time and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint. There are... restraint to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good... society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy. Real liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person {to make his own decision]... regardless of the injury that may be done to others... Person and property are subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens, in order to secure the general comfort, health, and prosperity of the State."... All rights are subject to such reasonable conditions as many be deemed by the governing authority... essential to the safety, health peace, good order and morals of the community. Even liberty itself, The greatests of all rights, is not unrrestricted license to act according to one's own will. It is only freedom from restraint under conditions essential to the equal enjoyment of the same right by others. It is then liberty regulated by law,...

The legislature of Massachusetts required the inhabitants of a city or town to be vaccinated only when, in the opinion of the Board of Health, that was necessary for the public health... It was appropriate for the legislature to refer that question... to a Board of Health, composed of person residing in the locality affected and appointed... because of their fitness to determine such questions. To invest such a body with authority over such matters was not an unusual nor an unreasonable or arbitrary requirement... A community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members... When the regulation in question was adopted, smallpox... was prevent in the city of Cambridge and the disease was increasing... The court would usurp the functions of another branch of government if it adjudged... that the mode adopted... to protect people... was arbitrary and not justified by the necessities of the supremacy of his own will and rightully dispute the authority of any human government... to interfere with exercise of that will. But it is equally true that in every well-ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at time... be subjected to such restraint... as the safety of the general public may demand...

If there were two ways to protect the public from a disease, it is not the court's function to determine which one should be used. That was for the legislative department to determine in... light of all the information it had or could obtain... The state legislature proceeded upon the theory which recognized vaccination as... an effective if not the best known way in which to meet and suppress the evils of a smallpox epidemic...

It must be conceded that some laymen... and some physicians of great skill and repute, do not believe that vaccination is a preventive of smallpox. The common belief... is that it has a decided tendency to prevent the spread of this fearful disease and to render it less dangerous to those who contract it. While not accepted by all, it is accepted by the mass of the people, as well as by most members of the medical profession... "The fact that the belief is not universal is not controlling, for there is scarcely any belief that is accepted by everyone.. The possibility that the belief may be wrong, and that science may yet show it to be wrong, is not conclusive..."

We are not prepared to hold that a minority, residing or remaining in any city or town where smallpox is prevent, and enjoying the general protection afforded by an organized local government, may... defy the will of its constituted authorities, acting in good faith for all, under the legislative sanction of the State... While this court should guard with firmness every right appertaining to life, liberty or property as secured to the individual by the Supreme Law of the Land,... It should not invade the domain of local authority except when it is plainly necessary to do so in order to enforce that law...

The judgment of the court below must be affirmed

it is so ordered.

PRO: Use the rules and argument contained in this case to support San Mateo County's argument that it has the power to mandate that all adult residents get the COVID-19 vaccination at no cost. Create a outline of the points you will make.

CON: Use the rules and argument contained in this case to support San Mateo County resident Suzanne Smith's argument that she should not be required to get a vaccine because she does not like them because she had an allergic reaction to a similar vaccine when she was a child. Create a outline of the points you will make.