3 ms·
It’s often legal to discriminate by age (that is literally what the drinking, driving, and smoking age limits are), but I believe that the government must have
by ashtonkem 6y ago
It’s often legal to discriminate by age (that is literally what the drinking, driving, and smoking age limits are), but I believe that the government must have a compelling interest in the restriction. This one seems extremely shaky to me, but as is common it’s likely that a lot of people will end up paying fines since they can’t afford to fight an order that may not stand up to judicial scrutiny.
- __blockcipher__ 6y agoThe problem is while technically Jacobson v Massachusetts is supposed to declare unreasonable restrictions unconstitutional, in practice it has allowed forced vaccination, forced sterilization, and forced detention. Oops!
- ashtonkem 6y agoThis is completely unrelated to what I said, to the point where it’s genuinely confusing what you’re going on about.
- __blockcipher__ 6y agoSorry for not making the connection clear enough. You mentioned a “compelling interest”; this is the same logic that was decided in Jacobson v Massachusetts which is the foundation for US case law regarding this topic. My point is that this does fall under that reasoning.