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 ]
1965: Griswold v. Connecticut (contraceptives as part of privacy rights for Estelle Griswold of New Haven's Planned Parenthood Center) [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 4 ] [ 7 ] During the 1960s, Emerson supported efforts to secure the release of Morton Sobell , convicted in 1951 of espionage as part of the case of Julius Rosenberg and Ethel Rosenberg .
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.
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 (1965) established that married couples have a right to purchase and use contraception without government interference in a 7–2 decision. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) showed that criminal penalties for sodomy or private sexual acts between consenting adults are unconstitutional. That decision came down in a 6 to 3 ruling.
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 ...
The penumbra-based rationale of Griswold has since been discarded; the Supreme Court now uses the Due Process Clause as a basis for various unenumerated privacy rights, as John Marshall Harlan II had argued in his concurring Griswold opinion, instead of relying on the "penumbras" and "emanations" of the Bill of Rights, as the majority opinion ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate; Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file