What US Supreme Court decisions have not extended an individual's right to privacy?

Answer 1

The Supreme Court determined the right to privacy is a fundamental liberty deserving constitutional protection under the doctrine of substantive due process, which has been extrapolated from the language of a number of Amendments and applied through the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. This concept has been instrumental in more than one decision. Some of the better known decisions include Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965), Roe v. Wade, (1973), and Lawrence v. Texas, (2003).

The "privacy" precedent was set in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965), which nullified laws restricting married couples' right to use and be counseled about the use of contraceptives.

Nearly a decade later, Roe v. Wade, 410 US 13 (1973) challenged a Texas anti-abortion law, and overturned statutes that prohibited abortion in 46 states (the procedure was legal in four), based on the right to privacy, which was extrapolated from language in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

More recently, the Court held the right to privacy invalidated a Texas sodomy law targeting homosexuals in Lawrence v. Texas,539 US 558 (2003).

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Answer 2

Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965) was a landmark US Supreme Court case in which the Court held a Connecticut law criminalizing counseling couples about contraception and/or prescribing contraceptive devices was a violation of privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. The Court held that the law (see below) improperly operated directly on an intimate relationship between husband and wife, and the physician's role as their medical provider.

The Court used the doctrine of substantive due process to assert a right to privacy as a fundamental liberty protected by the Constitution. The reasoning derives from various Amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth, that can be construed to protect different aspects of privacy.

Case Citation:

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965)

Answer 3

Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965) was a landmark US Supreme Court case in which the Court held a Connecticut law criminalizing counseling couples about contraception and/or prescribing contraceptive devices was a violation of privacy protected from interference by the States via the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. The Court used the doctrine of substantive due process to assert a right to privacy as an implied fundamental liberty protected by the Constitution.

The reasoning derives from various Amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth, and Ninth, that can be construed to protect different aspects of privacy. The Court held that the law (see below) improperly operated directly on an intimate relationship between husband and wife, and the physician's role as their medical provider.

General Statutes of Connecticut (1958 rev.)

53-32 and 54-196

Section 53-32 provides:

"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."

Section 54-196 provides:

"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."

Case Citation:

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965)

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Answer 4

The Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 US 558 (2003) found that a Texas law prohibiting gay sex infringed on the right to privacy.

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Answer 5

Griswold v. Connecticut, (1965) was a landmark US Supreme Court case in which the Court held a Connecticut law criminalizing counseling couples about contraception and/or prescribing contraceptive devices was a violation of privacy protected from interference by the States via the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. The Court used the doctrine of substantive due process to assert a right to privacy as an implied fundamental liberty protected by the Constitution.

The reasoning derives from various Amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth, and Ninth, that can be construed to protect different aspects of privacy. The Court held that the law (see below) improperly operated directly on an intimate relationship between husband and wife, and the physician's role as their medical provider.

General Statutes of Connecticut (1958 rev.)

53-32 and 54-196

Section 53-32 provides:

"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."

Section 54-196 provides:

"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."

Case Citation:

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965)

Answer 6

Griswold v. Connecticut

Answer 7

roe vs. wade