Anthony Champagne is a renowned professor at the University of Texas at Dallas. He has studied political science, and in his time, he has managed to champion three teaching awards. He is a writer who has authored books on legal representation of the low-standard people, the politics of Texas, and the election of judges, among others (Champagne “The Selection and Retention of Judges in Texas” 53). Based on Texas politics and congressional history, he has authored Congressman Sam Rayburn with over 130 verbal accounts with the help of his associates (Champagne “The Selection and Retention of Judges in Texas” 53). Since Champagne is published Boston Connection on Five Decades of House Democratic Leadership, which makes his article a credible source with considering as a repository of essential information and key conclusions from recent academic research..
According to the Jacobson v. Massachusetts Supreme Court case, there was an outbreak of smallpox in Cambridge, Massachusetts. There was a constitution of compulsory vaccination whereby if a person did not abide by the rules, they were fined (Mariner et al. 582). An individual named Henning Jacobson was fined $5 for refusing to be vaccinated. In the Supreme Court, she challenged his conviction of violating his liberty under the constitution. John Marshall Harlan a justice in Supreme Court ruled out that it was the duty of police to pass meaningful laws for the benefit of the community. As a result, four mandatory constitutional standards were developed for compulsory vaccination that would be used even in the future by Harlan.
COVID-19 brought about a state of emergency declaration across the whole world, while also demonstrating the lack of preparedness toward a global health crisis. From the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that the world should be prepared for unprecedented consequences and uncertainties at any given moment (Norouzi et al. 75). Constitution amendments are necessary to ensure safety and health for the whole globe (Chua et al. 1). Among the legal concerns, the constitution must include eminent domain to enable the government to take personal or natural properties whenever an emergency arises (Champagne “The Two Roles of Sam Rayburn” 5). Such cases can significantly impact the whole population as everyone needs to be guaranteed just compensation. Private property cannot be used for general help as the affected seem to have no justice and fairness. Emergencies exist, and everyone should be ready at any given moment to cope with the situation, but protections accorded within the constitution cannot be overshadowed as that should always remain the rule of law. During the pandemic, rights and freedom are not granted, such as movement and peaceful gatherings. People need to cooperate as the actions do ensure health and safety.
The specified concerns have resulted in several major legal issues. Specifically, the fact that the restriction imposed on U.S. citizens due to the pandemic were technically unconstitutional could be seen as a leeway to the question of whether constitutional rights can be ignored or revoked once a nationwide concern emerges, trumping these standards. Similarly, the extent of a concern in question for it to be seen as a legitimate rationale to abandon constitutional standards could be seen as a concept that required further definition.
Therefore, the issues of vaccination and the related constitutional concerns remain a problem to be addressed today. Vaccination has for long been manifested in combating the spread of infectious diseases. For young people in the field of law the mandatory vaccination law should never be permitted in the future even when the condition is hazardous. Therefore, the government should formulate a policy that allows people to be vaccinated without being forced to. The latter will help people have liberty with their health status. Moreover, the controversy at hand affects the future directly. Specifically, it leads to questioning whether specific health interventions must be made mandatory for all citizens, this, dismissing their constitutional rights. Similarly, the dilemma of restricting people’s mobility as the means of keeping them safe from an epidemic is likely to reoccur in the future, therefore, requiring a shift in healthcare and legal policies.
In conclusion, COVID-19 has been an excellent lesson for people to learn all aspects of life. Everyone needs to be prepared for any uncertainties that can occur in life. Government should have policies guaranteeing property, health, and safety for all people, especially policies on compulsory vaccination.
Works Cited
Champagne, Anthony. “The Selection and Retention of Judges in Texas.” SWLJ, vol. 40, 1986, p. 53.
Champagne, Anthony. “The Two Roles of Sam Rayburn.” East Texas Historical Journal, vol. 20, no. 1, 1982, p. 5.
Chua, Alvin Qijia, et al. “Health System Resilience in Managing the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons from SINGAPORE.”BMJ Global Health, vol. 5, no. 9, 2020, p. 1.
Mariner, Wendy K., George J. Annas, and Leonard H. Glantz. “Jacobson v Massachusetts: It’s Not Your Great-Great-Grandfather’s Public Health law.” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 95, no. 4, 2005, pp. 581-590.
Norouzi, Nima, Heshmat-Ullah Khanmohammadi, and Elham Ataei. “The Law in the Face of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Early Lessons from Uruguay.” Hasanuddin Law Review, vol. 7, no. 2, 2021, pp. 75-88.