Thread by @ToddZywicki

I never noticed this passage in Washington v. Harper (1990) before that indicates that to justify forcible injection of an individual there must not only be (1) danger to the inmate or others but (2) net benefit to the inmate:

"We hold that, given the requirements of the prison environment, the Due Process Clause permits the State to treat a prison inmate who has a serious mental illness with antipsychotic drugs against his will, if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others...

"and the treatment is in the inmate’s medical interest."

Is compelled vax of those with NI--given the trivial clinical benefit (if any) of vax in that context--in the individual's "medical interest"? I have yet to see anyone try to justify the benefit-risk calculation in that context and as @akheriaty has shown it can't be done.

@akheriaty @Leftylockdowns1 @NCLAlegal