Haxxed only please

[l0053g0053]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The monetary amount is irrelevant to the law itself as extant.

I bet you feel pretty silly right now.

A living document! :3

Jacobson also made a surprise appearance in a very different context.
Recall that the Jacobson Court suggested that the statute should not apply
in circumstances where doing so would be inhumane.105

The second group of citations involved abortion. In Roe v. Wade, as
well as a companion case, Jacobson was cited as proof that the Constitution
does not recognize an absolute right to control one’s own body.129

https://digital.sandiego.edu/cgi/vie...9&context=sdlr

What lessons can be distilled from this history? In most modern cases,
references to Jacobson were perfunctory, often as part of a string of citations,
giving the Court little reason for careful thought about the precedent’s
implications.134 The Supreme Court seems not to have thought of Jacobson
as establishing a special rule for contagious diseases or providing a specific
test for constitutionality.

sorry for deits

III. JACOBSON IN THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC
By the beginning of this century, Jacobson was a relatively obscure case
except to specialists in public health.139 The coronavirus pandemic brought
the century-old ruling into the limelight.140 Courts have not been able to
agree, however, on just what the case means for emergency public health
regulations. This dispute has led to circuit splits in cases dealing with
restrictions on abortions and religious gatherings.141 The issues in these
two categories of cases are somewhat different, so they will be discussed
separately below.

page 847 interesting.