Roosevelt v. Connecticut, 1965

Historical Context

1879 Connecticut Law: Banned the use of contraceptives, punishable by fines or up to a year in prison.
Moral Enforcement: Law was enforced to restore Protestant morality; opposition from religious leaders against abortion and birth control.
Unique State Laws: Connecticut and Massachusetts banned all birth control.

Planned Parenthood: Reproductive freedom organization opposing the ban, led by white, middle-class women.
Estelle Griswold: Executive director of Planned Parenthood Connecticut, provided contraceptives to married women, knowing it was illegal; aimed to challenge the law's constitutionality.
Catherine Rohrabach: Civil rights attorney representing Griswold, argued the law violated substantive due process and equal protection under the 14th Amendment.

14th Amendment: No deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process; laws against contraception inhibited healthcare for poorer women more than rich women.
State Defense: Argued the ban discouraged illicit sexual relations and upheld procreation as the purpose of sex.

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965): Case reached the Supreme Court; over 1 million American women were on birth control.
Decision: 7-2 plurality ruling the law violated the right to privacy for married couples using birth control.

Justice William O. Douglas: Found the right to privacy in several amendments, emphasized marital privacy from state intrusion.
Justice Arthur Goldberg: Located privacy rights in the Ninth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment incorporation.
Justice Harlan: Saw privacy rights under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, distinguishing marital privacy.
Justice Hugo Black (Dissent): Argued no constitutional provision for the right to privacy exists.
Justice Potter Stewart (Dissent): Criticized the law as silly but did not find it unconstitutional.

Constitutional Right to Privacy: Established by Griswold v. Connecticut, laying groundwork for Roe v. Wade (1973) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003).
Reproductive Freedom: Case was foundational for reproductive rights but initially only applied to married couples.
Eisenstadt v. Baer (1972): Extended contraceptive rights to unmarried individuals.
Modern Context: As of 2020, 60% of women of reproductive age use contraceptives.

Discussion Prompt: Contemplate why the court distinguished between married and unmarried couples regarding contraceptive use.