Griswold V Connecticut Case Study
Legal Hurdles With the introduction of Birth Control to the public it had its fair share of legal consequences. The case of Griswold v. Connecticut is considered the foundational decision in recognizing the constitutional right of sexual privacy (Stein, 2010, p. 29). In the case of Griswold v. Connecticut it was stated that Estelle Griswold and C. Lee Buxton were arrested for giving “information, instruction, and medical advice to married persons as to the means of preventing conception” (Stein, 2010, p. 29). Griswold was the executive director of the States Planned Parenthood League and C. Lee Buxton was a licensed physician as well as a professor at Yale (Stein, 2010, p. 29). The Connecticut law was that anyone that encouraged or used birth
…show more content…
They wanted to appeal because they believed that the people’s rights were being infringed upon. The Supreme Court found that Connecticut law violated the “right to marital privacy” (McBride, 2007). The First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). The Fourth and Fifth Amendments are described as protection against all governmental invasions "of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life” (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). Planned Parenthood asserted, “the state cannot dictate to husbands and wives what they may and may not do in their marital relations” (Stein, 2010, p. 100). The Supreme Courts stated that the state of Connecticut has to prove to the Courts that its law is "compelling" and "absolutely necessary" in order for the Supreme Court to overcome that right (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). Griswold was the a pro-marriage ruling and given the fact it was a case involving marriage and sex law, the decision strengthened the supremacy of heteronormative sexual expression (Stein, 2010, p. 29). The Oxford Dictionary defines heteronormative as Denoting or relating to a worldview that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation (Oxford, 2015). With the Supreme Court ruling it provided married couples with privacy. The lawyer in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut mentioned, “Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship” (Stein, 2010, p. 30). This helped set the groundwork for when other cases were brought up to the courts. Why is this court important to changing of urban sexualities in the 1960s? It is important because it provided women with the right to decide if they wanted to take contraceptive with worrying
They wanted to appeal because they believed that the people’s rights were being infringed upon. The Supreme Court found that Connecticut law violated the “right to marital privacy” (McBride, 2007). The First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). The Fourth and Fifth Amendments are described as protection against all governmental invasions "of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life” (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). Planned Parenthood asserted, “the state cannot dictate to husbands and wives what they may and may not do in their marital relations” (Stein, 2010, p. 100). The Supreme Courts stated that the state of Connecticut has to prove to the Courts that its law is "compelling" and "absolutely necessary" in order for the Supreme Court to overcome that right (Griswold v Connecticut, 1965). Griswold was the a pro-marriage ruling and given the fact it was a case involving marriage and sex law, the decision strengthened the supremacy of heteronormative sexual expression (Stein, 2010, p. 29). The Oxford Dictionary defines heteronormative as Denoting or relating to a worldview that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation (Oxford, 2015). With the Supreme Court ruling it provided married couples with privacy. The lawyer in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut mentioned, “Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship” (Stein, 2010, p. 30). This helped set the groundwork for when other cases were brought up to the courts. Why is this court important to changing of urban sexualities in the 1960s? It is important because it provided women with the right to decide if they wanted to take contraceptive with worrying