Free Essays, Term Papers, Research Papers at Anti Essays

Griswold v. Connecticut

Griswold was the executive director of planned parenthood. He was convicted under a Connecticut statute that made it a crime to assist our counsel someone for the purpose of preventing conception.Whether the Connecticut law is a constitutional exercise of the state’s police power in view of the substantive due process of the 14th amendment.

5. Holding: No.

6. Majority Reasoning: The court distanced itself from Lochner, stating that they do not sit as a “super-legislature” to determine the wisdom and need of laws that touch economic or social conditions. However, this law operates directly on the intimate relationship between husband and wife. Although there are rights that are not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights, the court has held that they nevertheless are constitutionally protected. For instance the right to choice in education (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, Meyer v. Nebraska). These rights were derived from the 1st amendment right of free speech, which was held to include the freedom of thought and to teach. Without those peripheral rights, the express rights would be less secure. Thus, the 1st amendment has a “penumbra” (shadow) where “privacy is protected from governmental intrusion.” Likewise, the 3rd amendment prohibition against quartering of soldiers, and the 4th amendment prohibition of search and seizure, and the 5th amendment self-incrimination clause, all have a penumbra of privacy. The 9th amendment guarantees that the bill of rights is not to be construed as exclusive of other rights retained byt he people. This present case lies within the zone of privacy created by these guarantees.

7. Concurrence Reasoning: [Goldberg] The due process clause of the 14th amendment does not incorporate all of the...