Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Griswold v. Connecticut , 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to use contraceptives without government restriction. [ 1 ]
Estelle Naomi Trebert Griswold (June 8, 1900 – August 13, 1981) was a civil rights activist and feminist most commonly known as a defendant in what became the Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut , in which contraception for married couples was legalized in the state of Connecticut , setting the precedent of the right to privacy .
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) A Connecticut law that criminalizes the use of contraception by married couples is unconstitutional because all Americans have a constitutionally protected right to privacy. Eisenstadt v.
W hen the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut and legalized the use of contraception by married women, the public response was muted. There is little evidence of ...
Justice Thomas’s May 28th concurring opinion in the case of Box v. Planned Parenthood, expressing concern about the eugenic roots and implications of “sex-, race-, and disability-selective ...
Catherine Gertrude Roraback (September 17, 1920 – October 17, 2007) was a civil rights attorney in Connecticut, best known for representing Estelle Griswold and Dr. C. Lee Buxton in the famous 1965 Supreme Court case, Griswold v. Connecticut, which legalized the use of birth control in Connecticut and created the precedent of the right to ...
Griswold and Buxton were arrested by the New Haven Police nine days after the clinic opened. [11] The resulting case against Buxton and Lee, The State of Connecticut v. Estelle T. Griswold and C. Lee Buxton, was affirmed by the Connecticut Supreme Court in April 1964, providing evidence that the case was ripe. [12] The appeal, known as Whitney v.
Between 1941 and the date of publication of Griswold v. Connecticut, the term was used eight times by Justice William O. Douglas and four times by other Justices. [19] Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Learned Hand also used the term eleven times between 1915 and 1950, usually to place emphasis on words or concepts that were ambiguous. [20]