{"title":"“A Vigorous Campaign against Abortion”: Views of American Leaders of Eugenics v. Supreme Court Distortions","authors":"Paul A. Lombardo","doi":"10.1017/jme.2023.90","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Supreme Court decided <span>Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky</span> in 2019. Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion in the case claimed there was a direct connection between the legalization of abortion, in the late 20th Century, and the beginnings of the birth control movement a full three quarters of a century earlier. “Many eugenicists,” Thomas argued, “supported legalizing abortion.”</p><p>Justice Samuel Alito highlighted similar claims in <span>Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health</span>, citing a brief entitled “The Eugenic Era Lives on through the Abortion Movement.” That brief was an echo of Justice Thomas’ misguided attempt at history in the <span>Box</span> opinion. Similar claims reoccur in Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s opinion in the Texas mifepristone case, <span>Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration</span>.</p><p>These false claims are the focus of this article. There is no evidence that early leaders of the eugenics movement supported abortion as part of the movement for birth control. It is accurate to describe those leaders as anti-abortion, and their followers as people who condemned abortion for moral, legal, and medical reasons.</p>","PeriodicalId":501694,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2023.90","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Supreme Court decided Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky in 2019. Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion in the case claimed there was a direct connection between the legalization of abortion, in the late 20th Century, and the beginnings of the birth control movement a full three quarters of a century earlier. “Many eugenicists,” Thomas argued, “supported legalizing abortion.”
Justice Samuel Alito highlighted similar claims in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, citing a brief entitled “The Eugenic Era Lives on through the Abortion Movement.” That brief was an echo of Justice Thomas’ misguided attempt at history in the Box opinion. Similar claims reoccur in Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s opinion in the Texas mifepristone case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
These false claims are the focus of this article. There is no evidence that early leaders of the eugenics movement supported abortion as part of the movement for birth control. It is accurate to describe those leaders as anti-abortion, and their followers as people who condemned abortion for moral, legal, and medical reasons.
2019年,最高法院判决了“博克斯诉印第安纳州和肯塔基州计划生育”一案。大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯(Clarence Thomas)在该案中的意见称,20世纪末堕胎合法化与整整四分之三个世纪前开始的计划生育运动之间存在直接联系。“许多优生学家,”托马斯说,“支持堕胎合法化。”法官塞缪尔·阿利托(Samuel Alito)在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康案(Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health)中强调了类似的主张,他引用了一份题为《优生时代通过堕胎运动得以延续》的摘要。那份摘要是托马斯大法官在“盒子案”中错误地试图追溯历史的一种呼应。类似的主张再次出现在法官Matthew Kacsmaryk在德克萨斯州米非司酮案,希波克拉底医学联盟诉美国食品和药物管理局的意见中。这些虚假的说法是本文的重点。没有证据表明优生学运动的早期领导人支持堕胎作为生育控制运动的一部分。准确地说,这些领导人是反堕胎的,他们的追随者是出于道德、法律和医学原因谴责堕胎的人。