...without legal justification was a battery. Before the turn of the century, this Court observed that "[n]o right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law." This notion of bodily integrity has been embodied in the requirement that informed consent is generally...

...(1966); Rochin v. California, supra, note 8; cf. Union Pacific Ry v. Botsford, 141 US 250,251 (1891) ("No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law" (emphasis added)). In W1nston v. Lee a robbery suspect challenged the state's right to compel him to...

...yesterday, Struck. Senator HATCH. Right. Judge GlNSBURG. It started in the 19th century. The Court then said no right is held more sacred or is more carefully guarded by the common law. It grew from our tradition, and the right of every individual to the control of his person. The line...

...recognized consistently since 1891 when, in Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford?0 the Court declared, "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...own person, free from all restraint or interference by others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law."91 In early American case law freedom...

...Judge Ginsburg said: It starts in the 19th century. The right of the individual, the Court then said no right is held more sacred or is more carefully guarded by the common law. It grows from our tradition, and the right of every individual to the possession and control of his...

...the primacy of the principle of individual bodily integrity that it recognized over a century ago: " '[n]o right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of the law.' " Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't of Health, 497 US 261, 269 (1990) (quoting Union Pacific...

...conscience." In the case of the Union Pacific Railway vs. Botsford, the United States Supreme Court said: "... No right is held more sacred or is more carefully...restraint or interference of others unless by clear and unquestioned authority of law. As well said by Judge Cooley: "The right of one's person may be said...

...early as 1 89 1 , the right to be free of unwanted touching was articulated by the US Supreme Court: "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...clear and unquestionable authority of law" (Union Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford 1891:25). Over 20 years later, Justice Benjamin Cardozo applied this thinking...

...See also Union Pacific Railway v. Botsford\4\ US 250. 251 (1891) where the court stated 'no right is more sacred or is more carefully guarded, by the common...unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law'. For a general discussion of the principles of self-determination, autonomy and inviolability, see the...

...at 72. 6i Ackerman, supra note 40, at 5i9. 62 See Union Pac. Ry. v. Botsford, i4i US 250, 25i (i89i) ("No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully...individual to the possession and control of his own person . . . ."); see also L. TRIBE, supra note 28, §§ i5-2 to i5-3, at i304-i2 (discussing rights of personhood)....