Constitutional Review; the Right to Privacy

Constitutional Review; the Right to Privacy

Introduction

In essence, the framers of the Constitution, in spite of their remarkable foresight, were men all the same with limitations. Therefore, they could not have foreseen the resounding changes in the social, political, and economy of America, which has undoubtedly affected the relationship between governments. By establishing Liberty, equality, and limited government as the foundations of the Constitution, the framers made a flexible constitution that could evolve as long as it stayed true to the basic ideas that are behind its contents. In light of this, the right to privacy is legal and constitutional because it protects the Liberty of the people from overhanded government action, which is the soul of the Constitution.

The right to privacy is legal and constitutional because it is underpinned by the principle of Liberty of the people and limited government that are central to the Constitution.

                                          The Main Ideas of the Constitution

Equality is among the top ideas embedded in the American Constitution. In essence, equality entails ensuring that every American is guaranteed an equal opportunity during the exploitation of their lives and talents. In a more detailed information, equality can also be the belief that no American should have a relatively diminishing poor chance s of living just because of the way and/or the place they are born. Ranging from disability, race, place of origin, religious belief among other factors. The Civil Right Act of 1866 suggested that every American citizen should be granted an equal protection by the law (Hassan 1987). Genesis 1:27 illustrates how we were all created in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, equality is the main tenets that hold mankind and it is God’s will. Besides equality, another main idea from the American Constitution is Liberty. Hypothetically, Liberty is the power and the will for one to act as he/she pleases. According to Zink (2009), Liberty is the main idea of the American Constitution because it advocates for a state which is free from oppressive restrictions imposed on the citizens. According to the American Constitution, civil liberties is essentially defined as the individual’s constitutional protection against powerful entities from the government. The defined Liberty ends up making the bill of rights, which includes the right to privacy, freedom of speech, as well as the right to bear arms. Zink (2009) further adder that Liberty turns out to be the main idea of the American Constitution that fostered democracy. Limited government also stands to be key ideas of the American Constitution. On the concept of the history of liberalism, the central role of the concept of limited government is to ensure that the federal government roles should be guided by the set Constitution. The limited government suggests that the federal government possesses no other power except the power imposed on them by the American Constitution. According to the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution, it makes it explicit that power not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the citizens of the United States.

Analyzing Griswold v. Connecticut

The right to privacy can also be termed as the right to be left alone. However, this concept has not been mentioned in the Constitution, but still, the amendments provided some protections. Among key entities that are protected by the statutory law under the right to privacy include the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) (Bruce 2007). This act helps in protecting the health information of an American. However, it is apparent that the right to privacy should always be balanced with the state’s priority of enhancing public safety while improving the quality of life of the Americans. The Connecticut law, which was passed in the 1800s, was applicable in some states in the United States (Ginsburg 2007). According to this law, individuals were not to access, advertise, or sell contraceptives. However, several lawmakers were against Connecticut law. In Griswold v. Connecticut, Griswold and Buxton argued that the Connecticut law disputed the 14^th Amendment. According to the 14 Amendment, the state should not deprive anyone’s Liberty, property, nor life. Regarding this, it is apparent that the Connecticut law was playing a crucial role in depriving Americans of their Liberty of doing as they please. From a loose constructionist perspective, it quite abhors that a doctor or a patient involved in the use of contraceptives is viewed as a criminal.  The use of contraceptives squarely depends on a person’s will. By trying to limit an individual’s will, it is the same as violating not only an individual’s right to privacy but also the liberty rights.

In the Griswold v. Connecticut case, the Supreme Court decision saw to it that the Connecticut law, which prohibited the use of contraceptive as well as contraceptive counseling, was overturned. Strict interpretationist perspective maintains that the Constitution’s primary obligation is not only to reinstate an individual’s general right to privacy. The essence of the bill of the bill of rights was to create penumbras or privacy zones into which the government has no obligation to interfere. From their ruling, it is apparent that the marital privacy of any American citizen should be maintained. The ruling ostensibly established that the right to marital privacy tends to be one of the most fundamental liberties that were enshrined in the American Constitution during the 14^th Amendment and protected from interference from states. Lockhart (2004) writes, in the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling, Justice Douglas pointed out that privacy within a marriage turns out to be a personal zone. Marriage privacy should be off-limits by the government. Either, despite the ruling against the Connecticut law, the use of contraceptives was also prohibited among the non-married couples. The Griswold v. Connecticut rule established that the right to privacy, which connects to the marriage privacy is only applicable to married couples. In essence, the Connecticut law violated the right to privacy within marriage and was found to be unconstitutional. However, the law was termed to be an “irrational discrimination” since it was only applicable to married couples. This led to the emergence of Eisenstadt v. Baird that allowed unmarried couples to use contraceptives.

The essence of Griswold v. Connecticut

According to Jeremiah 1:5, the bible tells us how God knew us even before we were born. From this perspective, it is apparent that using contraceptives goes against God’s will since the end result of all this is the death of the new unborn child who made by God. The Connecticut law was much inclined to what the bible advocated. The end decision of all this drama lies in the conscience of an individual. That is where the bill of rights emanates from. Overturning the Connecticut rule established that the decision to use or not to use a contraceptive is a product of an individual’s will. However, on most occasions, health coupled up with other factors play a significant role in influencing the decision of whether to take a contraceptive or not to take. On some occasions, a mother’s health can be in danger; thereby, the use of contraceptives will help in salvaging her from death, which will cost her the unborn. The Supreme Court ruling apparently led to the formation of a reproductive freedom foundation. From this ruling, the court was able to cite several hearings regarding the right to privacy. As a result of Griswold v. Connecticut, Women are now able to live a healthier life due to access to birth control. In regard to this contemporary world, couples are now able to invest in the future as a result of the availability of birth control techniques.

Conclusion

Supreme Court ruling regarding the Connecticut rule turns to be one of the best rulings that have significantly helped to shape the modern world families. Marriage privacy should be highly respected. It will be rational if married couples have the sovereign power to make decisions on when they should have children. This was the right to privacy that was overly violated before the ruling against the Connecticut law.

 

 

Bibliography

Lockhart, Andrea. “Griswold v. Connecticut: A Case Brief.” The Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 14, no. 1 (2004): 35.

Ackerman, Bruce. “The Living Constitution.” Harvard Law Review, 120, no. 7 (2007): 1737-1812.

Ginsburg, Ruth Bader. “Closing Remarks for Symposium on “Justice Brennan and the Living Constitution”.” California Law Review 95, no. 6 (2007): 2217-2220.

Hassan, Farooq A. “The US Constitution and its Contribution to Civil Liberties.” Pakistan Journal of American Studies 5, no. 2 (1987): 56.

Zink, James R. “The Language of Liberty and Law: James Wilson on America’s Written Constitution.” American Political Science Review 103, no. 3 (2009): 442-455.