week 6 assigment

docx

School

Chamberlain College of Nursing *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

330 N

Subject

Political Science

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ChefRock8222

1 Part 1:How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights As Citizens-Outline Besmira Mema Chamberlain University POLI 330N Professor Doas June 18, 2023 1

2 Part 1:How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights As Citizens-Outline Summary In 1879 P .T. Barnum, a Connecticut Senator, passed a bill prohibiting any form of birth control. Even though contraception laws were rarely implemented, courts had withstood legal challenges, most notably in the Supreme Court's 1961 Poe v. Ullman ruling(U.S. Supreme Court,1965). In collaboration, Lee Buxton, a Gynecologist and professor at Yale, and Estelle Griswold, the head of Planned Parenthood in Connecticut, opened a birth control clinic in New Heaven where they gave birth control and advice to married women. Since birth control was prohibited, their clinic was seen as a violation. Buxton and Griswold were arrested and convicted but used the clinic to challenge the Fourteenth Amendment's constitutionality, appealing to the Supreme Court. Justice William O. Douglas argued First Amendment freedom of assembly and speech encompassed intimate associations, leading to the unconstitutional Barnum Act and recognizing individual privacy as a fundamental right. On June 7, 1965, by a vote of 7–2, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to favor Griswold and Buxton and determined the anti-contraception law unconstitutional. Married couples now have a constitutional right to privacy regarding birth control, according to the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling(Seward,2008). Case Outline Title : Griswold versus Connecticut 381U.S.479(1965) Facts: In 1960, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first oral contraceptive, but it couldn't be used in Connecticut (Finlay, nd). Barnum law in 1879 prohibited contraception of any form. Buxton and Griswold wanted to challenge this law by opening a birth control clinic 2

3 and offering advice and contraceptives to married women seeking help. The Connecticut law found them guilty. Under the right of the Fourteen Amendment, Estelle Griswold appealed her case to the United States Supreme Court, where she won. History of the case: On November 9, 1961, Buxton and Griswold were arrested, convicted, and received a fine of 100 dollars each. The Connecticut Supreme Court maintained the defendants' convictions after hearing their appeal(Finlay, nd). Legal questions: According to the U.S. Supreme Court, The General Statutes of Connecticut (1958 Rev.) Sections 53-32 and 54-196 were the laws constitutionality issues in this appeal (1965): 1. Any person who uses a drug, medical item, or tool to prevent conception faces a minimum fine of $50, a maximum prison sentence of one year, or both (U.S. Supreme Court, 1965). 2. Anyone who helps, encourages, counsels, causes, employs, or orders another to commit a crime may be prosecuted and punished just like the main criminal(U.S. Supreme Court, 1965). Decision or Holdings : The U.S. Supreme Court favored Griswold on June 7, 1965. The court had nine judges which seven voted pro-Griswold and two against. Connecticut's anti- contraception law from 1879 was unconstitutional because it infringed on the right to privacy, allegedly protected by numerous sections of the Bill of Rights(Seward,2008). Verdict and Opinions: Griswold v.Connecticut case was argued on March 28 and 29 of 1965 at the U.S. Supreme Court. Seven judges made The decision on June 7, 1965, in favor of Griswold. 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 Concurring opinions: Mr. Justice Douglas mentioned in the penumbra of the First Amendment that privacy is shielded against governmental intervention(U.S Supreme Court, 1965). The Bill of Rights has penumbras that create zones of privacy, such as the right of association, the prohibition of soldier quartering, the Fourth Amendment's right to be secure, the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause, and the Ninth Amendment's protection against governmental invasions of privacy and sanctity. Mr. Justice Golberg, Warren, and Brennan joined, concurring and agreeing that Connecticut birth control was unconstitutional since it invaded marital privacy. Freedom of speech and press are fundamental personal rights protected by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause( U.S Supreme Court,1965). Dissenting opinions: Black rejected the majority's loose reasoning, arguing the Constitution lacks a right to privacy, and dismissed Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment views. Stewart claimed the birth control law was constitutional. Final verdict : Based on the penumbras of the Bill of Rights, the anti-contraception Connecticut law was found unconstitutional and gave the married couple a constitutional right to privacy and practice birth control(Seward,2008). Conclusion Griswold v. Connecticut case was a milestone decision made by The U.S. Supreme Court, which addressed the constitutionality of Connecticut law that criminalized the use of contraceptives even by married couples." T he Constitution is also changed by decisions and interpretations of the U.S. Supreme Court found in the written opinions of the justices" (Greenberg & Page,2018,p.39). Both men and women profited from the right to privacy since 4

5 they felt free to choose their lives without worrying about being persecuted by the state (Finley, nd). This case laid the foundation for decisions on reproductive rights and other topics on sex, marriage, and family freedoms, impacting landmark decisions like Roe v. Wade in 1973. 5

6 References Finley, Nancy,(n.d ) Taking on the State: Griswold v. Connecticut , Connecticut history.org https://connecticuthistory.org/taking- on -the -state-Griswold-v-Connecticut/ Greenberg, E. S., & Page, B. I. (2018). The Struggle for Democracy, 2018 Elections and Updates Edition (12th ed.). Pearson Education (U.S.). https://ambassadored.vitalsource.com/books/9780135246849 Justia U.S. Supreme Court,(nd). Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/381/479/ Seward, Sheraden,(2008)" Griswold v.Connecticut (1965)" Embryo Project Encyclopedia ISSN:1940-5030 https://embryo.asu.edu/handle/10776/1940 . 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

week 6 assigment

Related Documents