Amendment, which specifically states that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” (Con Law Textbook, pg. 547) Justice Harlan wrote a concurring opinion in which he argued that privacy is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice White also wrote a concurring opinion based on the due process clause.
Justices Black and Stewart were the dissenters in the case. Justice Black stated that “the Court talks about a constitutional “right of privacy” as though there is some constitutional provision or provisions forbidding any law to ever be passed which might abridge the “privacy” of individuals. But there is not.” (Con Law Textbook, pg. 548) Justice Black argued that the right to privacy is not found anywhere in the Constitution. He also goes on to say “I like my privacy as well as the next one, but I am nevertheless compelled to admit that government has a right to invade it unless prohibited by some specific constitutional provision. For these reasons I cannot agree with the Court’s judgement and the reasons it gives for holding this law unconstitutional.” (Con Law Textbook, pg. 548) Justice Black also strongly criticized and disagreed with the majority opinion’s interpretation of the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. Justice Stewart stated in his dissent that “In the course of its opinion the Court refers to no less than six Amendments to the Constitution: the…show more content… The three prongs of the Lemon Test are first, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose (the Purpose Prong); second, the statute’s primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion (the Effect Prong); and third, the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion (the Entanglement Prong). These prongs formed a comprehensive standard that potentially could be applied to all establishment clause disputes. (Con Law Textbook, pg.