Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
1. Estelle Griswold and Dr. C. Lee Buxton opened a birth control clinic in New Haven, CT. They were arrested, convicted, and fined in 1961. A Connecticut law made it illegal to use contraceptives and to "assist, abet, councel, cause, hire, or command" another to use contraceptives. Griswold and Buxton argued that this law violated the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment.
2. Griswold held that the Due Process Clause protects married couples' right to privaccy, which includes the right to use contraceptives. The opposing side argued that privacy is not in the Constitution.
3. Douglas (Clark agreed) wrote that marital privacy was protected by the Constitution because the amendments to the constitution create a "zone of privacy." The use of contraceptives is included in marital privacy.
4.Majority: Douglas (and Clark)
Some rights explicitly protected in the Bill of Rights have "peripheral" rights that are implicitly protected.
The 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments restrict the government from intervening, creating a "zone of privacy." The "marital bedroom" is a place that is private and off limits for government. Therefore, the CT law banning contraceptives violates the protection of privacy.
5. Concurrence: Goldberg (and Warren, Brennan)
The right to marital privacy is fundamental, therefore it is subject to strict scrutiny. CT law is meant to discourage premarital sex and adultery. The ban of contraceptives is too broad and irrational.
CT law violates the 14th Amendment because it violates basic values "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."
6: Dissent: Black and Stewart
The right to privacy is not in the Constitution, Bill of RIghts, or in any previous case hear d by the Supreme Court. Even if the CT law is unwise, it is still in accordance with the Constitution.