Mandatory Vaccination and the Failure of Modern Constitutional Law

Thanks for posting--my understanding of Law is awful.  However, if one understands that great kings and judges are highly focused on the job at hand, and most importantly are not self-seeking, justice is better served.  This is evident in the way that modern day constitutionalists poorly apply old case law inappropriately.  Perhaps what has been lost overtime regarding civil law is the absence of Justinian (Byzantine) and Platonic thinking when applied to justice for all.  Roberts is dismal.

I found the most interesting part of the discussion to be found in the fourth point nested under Jacobson and Lochner in 1905:

Fourth, the Court acknowledged that the government could not violate certain individual rights. Justice Harlan wrote, “There is, of course, a sphere within which the individual may assert the supremacy of his own will.” And if that sphere is encroached, people may “rightfully dispute the authority of…any free government existing under a written constitution, to interfere with the exercise of that will.”

I was quite surprised to hear this wordage in the discussion, especially the acknowledgment of the "supremacy of [one's] own will". This is the first time I have encountered the notion of a person's "willpower" or autonomy expressly detailed in a legal document.

I would certainly like to explore the idea more, and find other legal documents in the US legal system that reference and explore the legal notion of "willpower" as it pertains to the rights of man.

I think supremacy of one's will or power of the will is judicial where willpower is psychological.  If one is willing to die for one's belief, that isn't a matter of willpower, but a matter of choice.  That is where it would stand supreme over government authority.