屠宰场案例（1873年），是其成为第一个解释第十三和第十四修正案最高法院的判例。经过屠宰场的做法继续污染新奥尔良饮用水，路易斯安那州议会通过，允许城市创造一个公司基本上垄断了屠宰场行业的行为。感兴趣的屠宰肉类屠宰所有曾在新奥尔良市畜牧着陆和屠宰场公司这样做。的Butchers’ Benevolent Association, an organization of New Orleans butchers, assembled in multiple cases to sue on the grounds that the government, by creating the company, violated their privileges or immunities and deprived them of their liberty and property without due process as protected by the fourteenth amendment. Additionally, they claimed that Crescent city violated the 13th amendment, referring to their actions as “involuntary servitude.” They appealed after losing in all trial cases. The supreme court affirmed and held that neither their 13th or 14th amendment rights had been violated. The narrow reading of Privileges or Immunities in The Slaughterhouse Cases rendered the clause nearly insignificant.
因此，一个城市试图通过组织各种规定减少污染，在很多我们今天怎么有饮用水，旨在航线浪费了下水道系统的系统来调节局部有害的做法。也许是看它像健康和COVID19的现代术语安全菜市场（屠宰场）的规定：美国最近曾试图要求中国关闭他们的农贸市场下跌同时要求美国的人必须保持开放，这意味着在美国COVID19蔓延，这导致China to ban American imports of meat… it’s complicated.
We can’t say in context of this early 1800s abolitionism that because some whites in WWII found that their position of power and privilege conveniently allowed them to indulge in harms without consequences, therefore let’s erase the black experience and instead comfort whites taking the immoral luxury of perpetuating slavery and it’s associated language.
On Wednesday, 17 June 2020, the Atlantic Council’s GeoTech Center and Accenture held the second episode of the jointly presented Data Salon Series, featuring a presentation from Mr. Davi Ottenheimer, Vice President of Trust and Digital Ethics at Inrupt, that prompted animated discussion among participants about the nature of privacy, consent, and responsibility. The event focused on how our understanding of privacy and its preservation affects our ability to temporarily compromise it in the interest of addressing crises. These issues are particularly relevant to the ongoing pandemic, and their intersections with other topics—integrating different cultural priorities and expectations of privacy, ensuring data is truly representative of a diverse population, and examining the nuanced relationships between privacy, knowledge, and power—are especially timely.