12/15/13

Case Brief: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479

studentJD
Currently Briefing & Updating

Students Helping Students

Home

Case Briefs

Outlines

Books and Supplements

Gifts & Apparel

Contact Us

Student Case Briefs, Outlines, Notes and Sample Tests Terms & Conditions
2010 No content replication for monetary use of any kind is allowed without express written permission.
In accordance with UCC 2-316, this product is provided with "no warranties,either express or implied."
The information contained is provided "as-is", with "no guarantee of merchantability."

Back To Constitutional Law Briefs

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479
Chapter
Page

Supreme Court of the United States

1965

6
Title
Implied Fundamental Rights
952
Topic
Substantive Due Process: Privacy, Personhood, and Family
Griswold, the director of Planned Parenthood, was arrested for providing advice to married couples in violation of a noncontraception statute. Griswold contends that the statute violates the 14th Amendment.
Rule
o A right of personal privacy emanates [to come from a source] from the penumbras [gray area] of the Bill of Rights,
and it cannot be invaded absent a showing that the legislation is necessary to accomplish a compelling state
interest.
o A broad constitutional right of privacy protects intimate aspects of personal life from governmental intrusion. (i.e.,
the bedroom of a married couple).

Constitutional Law 6e
Geoffrey R. Stone,...
Best Price $3.00
or Buy New $123.26

Privacy Information

Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras (Creates Zone of Privacy)
o They guarantees that help give them life and substance.
o They create zones of privacy.
o The Third Amendment's prohibition against the quartering of soldiers, the Fourth Amendment's right of people to be
secure in their persons, the Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination, and the Ninth Amendment's right to
retain rights not enumerated in the Constitution

Quick Notes

Justice Douglas - In This Case - Married couples relationship lies within the zone of privacy
o The present case concerns a relationship lying within the zone of privacy created by several fundamental
constitutional guarantees.

Constitutional Law
Outline 2009 Eman...
Steven Emanuel

Justice Douglas - Goal is achieved by maximum destructive impact upon marital relationship
o Connecticut's law seeks to achieve its goals by means having a maximum destructive impact upon the marital
relationship.

Privacy Information

Justice Douglas - Overbroad statute

o The law sweeps unnecessarily broadly and thereby invades an area of protected freedoms.
Book Name
Issue

Best Price $4.13

or Buy New

Constitutional Law : Stone, Seidman, Sunstein, Tushnet. ISBN: 978-0-7355-7719-0

o

Whether there is a constitutional right of privacy which is protected from government intrusion? Yes. Personal privacy
is found and protected by penumbras in the Bill of Rights.
Procedure

Trial
Appellant

Supreme

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut, which convicted Griswold of violating a state law that prohibited the
dispensing or use of birth control devices to or by married couples.
o Affirmed
o The Court found a right of privacy implicit in the Third Amendment's prohibition against the quartering of soldiers, the
Fourth Amendment's right of people to be secure in their persons, the Fifth Amendment's right against selfincrimination, and the Ninth Amendment's right to retain rights not enumerated in the Constitution. The right of privacy
to use birth control measures was found to be a legitimate one. Thus, the Court concluded that Conn. Gen. Stat. 5332 (rev. 1958) was unconstitutional.
o

Facts/Cases
Pl - Griswold
Df - Connecticut
Description
o Griswold was the director of the
Planned Parenthood League of
Connecticut.
o He provided information,
instruction, and medical advice to
married persons as to the means
of preventing conception.

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules/Laws

Justice Douglas
Constitution right of privacy is protected from government intrusion
o We do not sit as a super-legislature to determine the propriety of laws that touch economic
problems, business affairs, or social conditions.

Gilbert Law Summaries

on Constitutio...
Jesse H. Choper
Best Price $6.00
or Buy New $30.73

Privacy Information

Operates on an intimate relation of husband and wife

o However, this law operates directly on an intimate relation of husband and wife and their
counselor's role in one aspect of that relation.

www.studentjd.com/Constitution/Griswold v. Connecticut[Ch 6][Implied Fundamental Rights][Substantive Due Process][Contraception Statute invades privacy].htm

1/4

12/15/13
of preventing conception.
o The Connecticut statute at issue
prohibited the use of contraceptive
devices.
o Another statute made it illegal to
abet or counsel another person to
commit any offense.
o Griswold was convicted under this
accessory statute for counseling
individuals to violate the
contraception law.
o He challenged the conviction on
the ground that the accessory
statute violated an implied privacy
provision in the Due Process
Clause of the 14th Amendment.
o The state appellate courts affirmed
the conviction.
o Supreme Court granted certiorari
and reversed

Case Brief: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479

Constitutional protected rights not expressly in the Bill of Rights
o Several fundamental rights are constitutionally protected even though they are not
expressly mentioned in the Bill of Rights.
o These include the right to educate one's child in the school of the parent's choice;
o the right to study language in private school; and
o the freedom to associate.
Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras (Creates Zone of Privacy)
o They guarantees that help give them life and substance.
o They create zones of privacy.

Kaplan PMBR FINALS

Kaplan PMBR
Best Price $9.62
or Buy New

Privacy Information

First Amendment
o The right of association.
o This a freedom not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution
Third Amendment
o Its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers in any house in time of peace without
the consent of the owner is another facet of that privacy.

Law in A Flash Cards

Steven Emanuel, Ki...

Fourth Amendment
o Explicitly affirms the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.
o Creates a penumbra that protects privacy interests.
Fifth Amendment
o Prohibits self-incrimination and enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy
which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment.

Best Price $160.00

or Buy New $197.55

Privacy Information

Ninth Amendment
o Provides that the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed
to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Court - In This Case - Married couples relationship lies within the zone of privacy
o The present case concerns a relationship lying within the zone of privacy created by
several fundamental constitutional guarantees.
Court - Goal is achieved by maximum destructive impact upon marital relationship
o Connecticut's law seeks to achieve its goals by means having a maximum destructive
impact upon the marital relationship.
Court - Overbroad statute
o The law sweeps unnecessarily broadly and thereby invades an area of protected freedoms.
Reversed
Concur - Justice Goldberg
o Personal rights are not confined to specific terms of the Bill of Rights
Marital privacy is protected, but not explicitly listed in the Constitution
o Liberty embraces the right of marital privacy, although that right is not explicitly listed in the
Constitution.

Law School Legends

Constitutional La...
John C. Jeffries J...
Best Price $38.85
or Buy New $49.82

Privacy Information

Ninth Amendment additional fundamental rights not in Bill of Rights

o My position is supported by the Ninth Amendment, which reveals that the Framers believed
there are additional fundamental rights, protected from government infringement, which are
not listed in the Bill of Rights.
This law would ignore the Ninth Amendment
o Allowing the fundamental right of marital privacy to be infringed by the State would ignore
and give no effect to the Ninth Amendment.
Strict Scrutiny Approach
o Rather, the State may prevail only upon showing a compelling interest, and the law
must be necessary to accomplish that interest.

Sum & Substance Audio

on Constitutio...
Mary M. Cheh
Best Price $26.28
or Buy New

Privacy Information

Does not meet strict scrutiny, could tailor it.

o Connecticut has not, and cannot, meet this strict test.
o Connecticut's purported purpose for the law, in preventing extra-marital relations, can be
served by a more discriminately tailored statute, which does not sweep unnecessarily
broadly.
Concur - Justice Harlan
Does the statute infringe on the Due Process Clause
o The proper inquiry is whether the statute infringes the Due Process Clause because it
violates basic values implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.

www.studentjd.com/Constitution/Griswold v. Connecticut[Ch 6][Implied Fundamental Rights][Substantive Due Process][Contraception Statute invades privacy].htm

2/4

12/15/13

Case Brief: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479

violates basic values implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.
Statute is intolerable and unjustifiable invasion
o Connecticut's contraception statute is an intolerable and unjustifiable invasion of privacy in
the conduct of the most intimate concerns of an individual's life.
Must pass strict scrutiny
o In order to be constitutional, the statute must pass a strict scrutiny analysis.
o Connecticut does not even suggest a justification for the intrusive means it has chosen to
effectuate its policy.
Concur - Justice White
Deprives married couples of liberty without due process
o The Connecticut statute deprives married couples of liberty without due process.
o The statute bears a substantial burden of justification when attacked under the 14th
Amendment.
Invades a protected area of privacy
o An examination of the justification cannot be avoided, however, by saying that the statute
invades a protected area of privacy.
If reasonably necessary, then not invalid
o Such statutes, if reasonably necessary for the effectuation of a legitimate and substantial
state interest, and not arbitrary and capricious in application, are not invalid.
Connecticuts claim
o Connecticut contends the statute serves the State's policy against all forms of
promiscuous or illicit sexual relationships.
Punishes married couples
o But I fail to see how the ban on contraceptives by married couples reinforces the State's
ban on illicit sexual relationships.
o At most, the broad ban is of marginal utility to the declared objective.
o I find nothing in the record justifying the sweeping scope of the statute.
Dissent - Justice Black
o The law is every bit as offensive to me as it is to my Brethren.
o Government has to invade privacy, UNLESS prohibited by some specific constitutional
provision.
o The concurrences that rely on the Ninth Amendment and due process merely use
different words to claim the power to invalidate any legislative act which the judges
find irrational, unreasonable, or offensive.
Legislature should make such decisions, which they did in this case
o The power to make such decisions is legislative.
o The Ninth Amendment was passed to assure the people that the Constitution was intended
to limit the Federal Government to the powers expressly or implicitly granted.
o I reject the philosophy that this Court has a duty to keep the Constitution in tune with the
times.
o Subjective considerations of "natural justice" are dangerous, whether used to enforce the
Court's view about personal or economic rights.
o So far as I am concerned, Connecticut's law is not forbidden by the Constitution as it was
written.
Dissent - Justice Stewart
This is a silly law
However, we are not asked to say whether we think the law is unwise, or even asinine.
We are asked to hold that it violates the Constitution, and this I cannot do.
I find nothing in the Bill of Rights to invalidate the Connecticut law, and to say the Ninth
Amendment

Rules
Rule
o A right of personal privacy emanates [to come from a source] from the penumbras [gray area] of the Bill of Rights, and it cannot be
invaded absent a showing that the legislation is necessary to accomplish a compelling state interest.
o A broad constitutional right of privacy protects intimate aspects of personal life from governmental intrusion. (i.e., the bedroom of a
married couple).

Class Notes

www.studentjd.com/Constitution/Griswold v. Connecticut[Ch 6][Implied Fundamental Rights][Substantive Due Process][Contraception Statute invades privacy].htm

3/4

12/15/13

Case Brief: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479

www.studentjd.com/Constitution/Griswold v. Connecticut[Ch 6][Implied Fundamental Rights][Substantive Due Process][Contraception Statute invades privacy].htm

4/4