Griswold v. Connecticut

Griswold v. Connecticut
Name	Griswold v. Connecticut
Case name	Griswold v. Connecticut
Citation	381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Decided	June 7, 1965
Decided by	Warren Court
Chief justice	Earl Warren
Lead justice	William O. Douglas
Majority	Douglas
Majority justices	Hugo Black, William J. Brennan Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron White
Concurring justices	John M. Harlan, Felix Frankfurter
Dissenting justices	Thomas was not a member of the Court; John M. Harlan in part
Laws	U.S. Const., Fourteenth Amend., Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-32

Griswold v. Connecticut was a landmark Supreme Court case that ruled in favor of the right to marital privacy, effectively overturning a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of birth control. The case was decided on June 7, 1965, with a 7-2 decision. The Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause protects the right of marital privacy, and that a state's ban on the use of contraceptives for married couples was unconstitutional. The case was a significant milestone in the history of reproductive rights in the United States.

Background and legal context

The case began in 1961 when Estelle Griswold, the executive director of the Connecticut Planned Parenthood League, and her colleague, Dr. Lee Buxton, were arrested for providing birth control counseling and services to married couples in New Haven, Connecticut. The couple was charged with violating Connecticut's Comstock law, which made it a crime to use or provide birth control.

The law at issue, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-32, was enacted in 1879 and stated that "any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception shall be fined or imprisoned." The law had not been enforced for many years, but in 1961, the Connecticut legislature reaffirmed its commitment to the law.

The case made its way to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case in 1965. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represented Griswold and Buxton, arguing that the law was unconstitutional and infringed upon the right to marital privacy.

Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Griswold and Buxton, holding that the Connecticut law was unconstitutional. The Court found that the law infringed upon the right to marital privacy, which was protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The majority opinion, written by Justice William O. Douglas, stated that the right to marital privacy was a fundamental right that was protected by the Constitution. The Court also noted that the law had not been enforced for many years and that it was an "unreasonable" and "arbitrary" restriction on the right to marriage.

Majority opinion

The majority opinion, written by Justice Douglas, held that the Connecticut law was unconstitutional because it infringed upon the right to marital privacy. The opinion stated that "the right to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men." The opinion also noted that the law had a "devastating effect" on the marriage relationship, as it forced couples to "abstain from sexual relations" or risk prosecution.

The opinion further stated that the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause protects the right to marital privacy, and that the Connecticut law was an "arbitrary" and "unreasonable" restriction on this right. The opinion concluded that the law was unconstitutional and that Griswold and Buxton were entitled to judicial relief.

Concurring and dissenting opinions

Justice John M. Harlan and Justice Felix Frankfurter filed concurring opinions, agreeing with the majority that the Connecticut law was unconstitutional. Justice Harlan argued that the right to marital privacy was a fundamental right that was protected by the Constitution, while Justice Frankfurter emphasized the importance of judicial restraint in constitutional adjudication.

Justice Hugo Black and Justice William J. Brennan Jr. also filed a concurring opinion, arguing that the Connecticut law was unconstitutional because it infringed upon the right to marital privacy. Justice Black noted that the law was an "arbitrary" and "unreasonable" restriction on the right to marriage, while Justice Brennan emphasized the importance of protecting the marriage relationship.

Justice White did not participate in the decision.

Impact and legacy

The Griswold v. Connecticut decision had a significant impact on the history of reproductive rights in the United States. The case established the right to marital privacy as a fundamental right protected by the Constitution, and it paved the way for future cases involving reproductive rights, including Roe v. Wade (1973).

The case also had a significant impact on the development of privacy law in the United States, as it recognized a broad right to privacy that extends beyond the marriage relationship. The case has been cited in numerous Supreme Court decisions, including Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), which extended the right to birth control to unmarried couples.

The Griswold v. Connecticut decision has also been recognized as a significant milestone in the women's rights movement, as it acknowledged the importance of women's autonomy and decision-making in matters related to reproduction. The case has been celebrated as a major victory for reproductive rights and privacy advocates, and it continues to be an important part of American constitutional law. Estelle Griswold's efforts were also recognized by President John F. Kennedy, who appointed her to the Commission on the Status of Women in 1961.