Connecticut Case

This case challenged the rights of marital privacy within the home. In 1961, Griswold and her partner, Dr. Buxton, opened a birth control clinic in New Haven, Connecticut. A law enacted in 1879 made it illegal to use anything to prevent contraception in the state. That’s right, nothing could be used to prevent pregnancy. Consequently due to their actions, Griswold and Buxton were arrested, tried, found guilty, and fined to pay $100. Griswold appealed her conviction to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the state was in breach of multiple amendments including the fourteenth, first, and of course, the third amendment. The argument based on the third amendment was that the home is and should be a private place. No one is to know what happens in the home, or in the bedroom for that matter. The only way to prove that the women who visited the clinic were actually using birth control would be storm their homes. In the end, it was found that Connecticut's actions were unconstitutional and this court case paved the way for future cases such as the famous Roe vs Wade

In 1879, Connecticut passed a law that prohibited the use and education of contraceptives to both married and unmarried women, men, etc. Since this law was said to be seldom enforced, a Planned Parenthood in New Haven, Connecticut decided to take the risk. The executive director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, Estelle Griswold, and a doctor and professor at Yale Medical School, Dr. C. Lee Buxton, were arrested, found guilty, and fined $100 each (equivalent to about $750 U.S. today) for counseling a married couple about contraceptives and prescribing birth control to the wife. They appealed to the Supreme Court of Connecticut, where the Connecticut court upheld their conviction. Griswold and Buxton appealed to the Supreme Court of the

Eisenstadt v. Baird was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court. It ruled in favor of unmarried couples using birth control. Griswold v. Connecticut provided the right for secrecy under the marital bedroom only, but not birth control on unmarried couples. The ruling was based it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The argument was simple. The law which the defendants were penalized was a Massachusetts law of “Crimes Against Chastity”. Because it did not prosecuted marry couples due to buying, possessing, or using birth controls, it was discriminatory this law persecuted unmarried couples for it. Also it was ruled one of the defendants was exercising his freedom of speech, when distributing birth control. Therefore he could not be punished. Judge Brennan wrote in his opinion

The Birth Control Movement of 1912 in the United States had a significant impact on Women’s Reproductive Rights. Women in the 1800s would frequently die or have complications during or after childbirth. Even if the woman would have died, they would still have a great amount of children. As the years progressed into the 1900s, the amount of children being born dropped. Because of this, birth control supplements were banned, forcing women to have a child that she was not prepared for or did not want to have in the first place.

On June 7th 1965, married couples in the State of Connecticut received the right to acquire and benefit from contraceptive devises. In a majority decision by the United States Supreme Court, seven out of the nine judges believed that sections 53-32 and 54-196 of the General Statues of Connecticut , violated the right of privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The case set precedence by establishing marital (and later constitutional) privacy, and had notable influence on three later controversial ruling=s in Roe v. Wade (1973), Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) . The issue at hand was, and is still, one that still causes debate, wether a state has the

In Griswold v. Connecticut: Birth Control and the Constitutional Right of Privacy, Johnson outlines the struggle to overturn an 1897 Connecticut anticontraception law while arguing for the right of privacy. In the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, attorney Thomas Emerson argued that the “anticontraception statutes denied Griswold and Buxton their right to liberty and property without due process of law, as guaranteed by the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Furthermore, in constructing the constitutional right of privacy, Emerson cited the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Then, in the Supreme Court’s 1965 majority opinion, Justice William Douglas stated that “The First Amendment… has a penumbra where privacy is protected from government intrusion.” He went on to elaborate that the 1897 Connecticut anticontraception law was unconstitutional because “a law such as Section 53-32 that attempts to punish the mere use of contraceptives ‘sweep[s] unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade[s] the area of protected freedoms.’” Therefore, Griswold was finally able to achieve a fight that had begun fifty years prior.

Griswold was a Executive Director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, she and another gave some instructions about birth control and some other ways of planned parenthood in the state of Connecticut. Griswold was convicted under a Connecticut law which criminalized the provision of counselling, to married persons for purposes of preventing conception. (along with with some other medical treatment) The conclusion is although that the constitution does not directly protect the right to privacy, the numerous zones in the Bill of Rights, do establish a right to privacy. The Connecticut statute conflicts with this right, therefore making it void. At first the case was on the side on Connecticut, until the case was later overturned by

Often times in today’s world we take certain luxuries for granted. The right to vote, the right of free speech, etc. But one of those luxuries that people often don’t consider is the right for women to use birth control. The Supreme Court case that argued for the use of contraceptives was Griswold vs Connecticut. The court case was argued March 29th-30th 1965, but was not decided until June 7th 1965. The case was on the debate of whether or not the use of contraceptives should be legalized. Griswold, the Executive and Medical Director of Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, was on the side arguing for the legalization of the use of contraceptives in a marriage. While the opposing side, the state of Connecticut statute, had forbidden the use of contraceptives since 1879.

Feminist recognized the opportunity the pill gave to gaining equality with men and disputed laws that provided contraceptives for only married couples. Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965 and Massachusetts v. Baird in 1972 are two cases that helped to increase the availability of contraceptives in the United States. In the case of Griswold v. Connecticut a lawyer was convicted by the state of connecticut for giving contraceptives to a married couple. The Connecticut law that prohibited the use of birth control stated:

Facts: Griswold v. Connecticut is similar to the case Roe v. Wade which are both based on the problem of privacy. Griswold the Executive Director of Planned Parenthood is a licensed medical director. He was also a professor at Yale University Medical School. Griswold gave advice to a married couple on how to prevent conception by using contraceptives. Under the law Connecticut violated the counseling or medical treatment to a married couple for the purpose of preventing conception.

In the past year the Board of Trustees have allocated capital funds on the recommendation of Headmaster John Loring to the athletic programs of the school. The faculty and staff have expressed their concern about the spending decisions of the headmaster to support athletic programs over the needs of the students and faculty. This year the trustees have included the faculty in the decision process in order to objectively create a capital budget which will be in the long-run interest of the school.

When talking about Supreme Court decisions that have greatly impacted the lives of women it is very hard to settle on just five of the many cases that have been ruled in favor of the rights of women. When discussing the topic of reproductive freedom and The Supreme Courts rulings on these matters ten cases can and must be discussed in order to provide a total overview and timeline of these historic rulings. The American Civil Liberties Union has helped women breech the barriers of sexual repression, and has crusaded to help women win these reproductive rights and knowledge over the years since its founding in the repressed 1920's. In the decades following

In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court finally recognized a right to privacy in the U.S. Constitution. The authors state, “The case involved a Connecticut law that made it illegal for married couples to use contraceptives, or birth control. (Contraceptives prevent a woman from getting pregnant when she has sexual intercourse.) Nothing in the Constitution specifically says married couples have a right to use birth control. The court, however, said the law interfered with “the right of privacy in marriage.” In other words, privacy for married couples in America allows them to decide whether to use contraceptive devices” (Brannen, Hanes, and Shaw 68).

Abortion did not immediately engrave itself onto public agenda; it had help. The legal debate over the use of birth control proved to be the catalyst needed to propel abortion to the Supreme Court and into the ranks of public policy. The birth control movement was significant to Roe v. Wade because it served as a key in which to unlock the gates of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Courts decision to hear Griswold v. Connecticut, a case that challenged the Connecticut statute prohibiting anyone to “use any drug, article, or instrument to prevent conception or to give assistance or counsel in its use (p.39)”, is arguably the most significant factor in the Court’s

In years prior to the birth control pill, anti-obscenity laws in the U.S., like the Comstock Act in 1873, prohibit advertisements, information, and distribution of birth control in its entire form from doctors (Evans, p. 143). Birth control started off as a well kept secret and was hidden from most of the public, including women. The major shift came when the FDA approved an oral contraceptive pill in 1960 thanks to a huge push from birth control activist, Margaret Sanger, her partner Katharine McCormick, and a team of doctors (Evans, p. 265-266). A court case