| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Skinner v. Oklahoma ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Skinner v. Oklahoma
''Skinner v. State of Oklahoma, ex. rel. Williamson'', 316 U.S. 535 (1942),〔 〕 was the United States Supreme Court ruling which held that laws permitting the compulsory sterilization of criminals are unconstitutional if the sterilization law treats similar crimes differently.〔Maggs, Gregory E. and Smith, Peter J. (2011) Constitutional Law. A Contemporary Approach. Thomson Reuters. p. 536. ISBN 978-0-314-27355-0 〕 The relevant Oklahoma law applied to "habitual criminals," but the law excluded white-collar crimes from carrying sterilization penalties. The Court held that treating similar crimes differently violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. 〔
==Background==
Under Oklahoma's Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act of 1935, the state could impose a sentence of compulsory sterilization as part of their judgment against individuals who had been convicted three or more times of crimes "amounting to felonies involving moral turpitude". The defendant, Jack T. Skinner, had been convicted once for chicken-stealing and twice for armed robbery.
The motivation behind the law was primarily eugenic: to try to weed out "unfit" individuals from the gene pool. Criminal sterilization laws like the one in Oklahoma were designed to target "criminality," believed by some at the time to possibly be a hereditary trait
. Most punitive sterilization laws, including the Oklahoma statute, prescribed vasectomy as the method of rendering the individual infertile (which, unlike castration, does not affect sexual urge or function) in males, and salpingectomy in females (a relatively invasive operation, requiring heavy sedation, and hence with more risks to personal well-being).
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Skinner v. Oklahoma」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|