Nebraska’s STD marriage ban: Outdated eugenic law vs. modern reality
The assertion that marrying someone while having a sexually transmitted disease is illegal in Nebraska is not entirely accurate based on current law. While this was the case decades ago under eugenic marriage laws, modern Nebraska law focuses on criminalizing the transmission of an STD to an unknowing partner rather than outlawing the marriage itself. Nebraska Revised Statute 42-102 proclaims that “no person who is afflicted with a venereal disease shall marry in this state,” though State Senator Matt Hansen introduced legislation to strike that language. This shift reflects broader changes in legal philosophy from preventing certain people from marrying to protecting individuals from non-consensual exposure to disease.
The eugenic marriage era
In the early 20th century, many states, including Nebraska, passed eugenic marriage laws requiring medical examinations, including tests for venereal diseases, before issuing marriage licenses. Those laws required marriage licenses to be issued only after medical examinations. They were designed to save innocent women from lives of misery, prevent stillbirth or premature death in children, and save future generations from the myriad afflictions that accompanied “venereal infection.” The measure has been on the books in Nebraska since at least 1944 and has not been amended since the 1970s. These laws gave states authority to deny marriage licenses to individuals with STDs, disabilities, or other conditions deemed undesirable, reflecting attitudes that prioritized social engineering over individual rights.
Criminal transmission replaces marriage prohibition
Under Nebraska’s Revised Statutes 28-109, 28-308, and 28-310, a person who transmits an STD in Nebraska will face charges under Nebraska’s assault statute. The key legal issue is not the marriage but the act of transmission, holding infected persons responsible for failing to inform partners of their STD status before engaging in sexual activity. This approach recognizes that marriage itself doesn’t cause harm but that non-consensual exposure to disease constitutes a violation of bodily autonomy.
Hansen’s reform efforts
Hansen’s bill would add a provision to allow a marriage to be annulled if “either party had an undisclosed sexually transmitted disease at the time of marriage.” He explained that “we had a constituent call us who had wanted an annulment for that reason, but the confusing case law ultimately stopped them, so we want to strike the old language.” Hansen stated, “I do not know of this ever being enforced,” noting it’s a relatively obscure piece of legislation. States routinely repeal their outdated laws, though many odd statutes persist across America.
Conclusion
The prohibition against marrying someone with an STD is an artifact of outdated eugenic law that modern statutes have replaced, focused on knowing and non-consensual exposure and transmission of disease, whether married or not. This evolution demonstrates how legal systems can shift from discriminatory policies to frameworks that emphasize informed consent.
Related:
- Bizarre historical laws that were once taken completely seriously
- Questionable childhood toys that parents let us play with in the ‘70s
Like MediaFeed’s content? Be sure to follow us. This article was syndicated by MediaFeed.org.
AlertMe
