Compare And Contrast Griswold Vs Ct

When it comes to law, there is fine line between what the government is entitled to be involved in and what should be left to the privacy of individuals. Marriage is a situation where it can become tricky to understand when the government has the right to intervene. Griswold v. CT deals with a delicate situation between government force and the privacy of marriage in regard to the sale of contraceptives. Although the case ruled that there would be privacy granted to married couples, Justice Potter Stewart and Justice Black had dissenting opinions regarding how this decision was reached. They believed that there was not enough adequate evidence to reach this decision, and that it simply was not the court’s power or responsibility to deal with legislative aspects of the case. Their dissent failed to acknowledge living constitutionalism, as well as the moral obligation and qualifications of Supreme Court judges to expand their power and focus on …show more content…
The dissenting side failed to recognize the notion of living constitutionalism. The Constitution was left vague for the purpose that it could be interpreted in different ways and change with circumstances. Although the exact words regarding marital privacy are not stated in the document, interpretation is important in deciding how the Constitution should govern the people. For example, the penumbras and the ninth amendment protects the privacy in ways not mentioned specifically in earlier amendments: “certain rights, shall not be construed to deny”. In the intimacy of marriage, privacy was assumed to be a civil right. The Constitution should not be followed through strict constructionism, as this leaves little room to apply the law to modern circumstances. Therefore, the dissenting judges were not considering how the Constitution’s meaning has changed with