Griswold v CT (1965)
The head of Connecticut's Planned Parenthood was arrested for violating a Connecticut state law that prohibited the use or distribution of birth control. Griswold appealed her conviction on the grounds that the constitution provided a right to marital privacy that made the Connecticut law unconstitutional. The Supreme Court agreed, and in the majority opinion stated that the bill of rights is not a series of direct points, but instead a progression which protects from any unreasonable intrusion. The CT law, falling into that category, was deemed unconstitutional. This case had far-reaching implications; for one, it created a precedent to be cited later in Roe v Wade, as well as explicitly confirming that the constitution provided a right to privacy.
The head of Connecticut's Planned Parenthood was arrested for violating a Connecticut state law that prohibited the use or distribution of birth control. Griswold appealed her conviction on the grounds that the constitution provided a right to marital privacy that made the Connecticut law unconstitutional. The Supreme Court agreed, and in the majority opinion stated that the bill of rights is not a series of direct points, but instead a progression which protects from any unreasonable intrusion. The CT law, falling into that category, was deemed unconstitutional. This case had far-reaching implications; for one, it created a precedent to be cited later in Roe v Wade, as well as explicitly confirming that the constitution provided a right to privacy.