In the landmark 1965 case of griswold v connecticut the


In the landmark 1965 case of Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court examined a Connecticut statute that made it a crime for any person to use contraception. The majority declared the law an unconstitutional violation of the right of privacy. Justice Black dissented, saying, "I do not to any extent whatever base my view that this Connecticut law is constitutional on a belief that the law is wise or that its policy is a good one. [It] is every bit as offensive to me as it is to the majority. [There is no criticism by the majority of this law) to which I cannot subscribe - except their conclusion that the evil qualities they see in the law make it unconstitutional." What legal doctrines are involved here? Why did Justice Black distinguish between his personal views on the statute and the power of the Court to overturn it?

Request for Solution File

Ask an Expert for Answer!!
Financial Management: In the landmark 1965 case of griswold v connecticut the
Reference No:- TGS02388531

Expected delivery within 24 Hours