Griswold v. Connecticut (1965),

844 Words4 Pages
1) Essay Using the case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), make the argument for legal formalism (original intent) of the Connecticut law banning contraceptive information or devices. Then make the opposite argument based on legal realism. The case came about when the state Planned Parenthood League opened a clinic in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1961, two staff members, Estelle Griswold and C. Lee Buxton, were arrested and fined under a rarely used law for giving advice and a prescription[->0] for a contraceptive[->1] to a married couple. The defendant argued that she had a constitutional right to privacy that was violated by enforcement of the 1879 state law. (Ivers, p.33) A legal team lead by Thomas Emerson represented Griswold and Buxton in this case. Emerson argued that the “liberty” part of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was too broad to encompass the right to privacy that allowed married couples to get information and use birth control. The court struck down the Connecticut law saying that it violated the right of privacy protected by the US Constitution. (Ivers, p.33) According to the 53-32 of the General Statutes of Connecticut provided that "Any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception shall be fined not less than fifty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days nor more than one year or be both fined and imprisoned." and 54-196 of the General Statutes of Connecticut states “Any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principal offender." When I carefully looked over this case, my argument on this is that Connecticut shouldn’t had such law. The law clearly does violates the rights of the persons privacy according to the Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution. The
Open Document