Download
1 / 18
180 likes | 401 Views
American Constitutional Law LAW-210. The Right to Privacy Under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. Unit Objectives. At the completion of this unit, students should be able to: Describe the constitutional sources for the right to privacy.
E N D
American Constitutional LawLAW-210 The Right to Privacy Under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses
Unit Objectives At the completion of this unit, students should be able to: Describe the constitutional sources for the right to privacy. Identify and explain the standard used by the Supreme Court to review laws or government practices that interfere with the right to privacy. List specific examples of conduct protected by the constitutional right of privacy. Explain the relationship of the Ninth Amendment to the right of privacy. Explain why the Court struck down a law limiting the right to marry of individuals who owed child support.
Unit Objectives(Continued) Explain why the Supreme Court invalidated a law authorizing the sterilization of repeat felons for crimes involving moral turpitude. Describe specific rights affirmed by the Supreme Court related to contraceptives. Describe situations in which the Court has limited the decision of Roe v. Wade. Summarize the Court’s reason for overturning a Texas state law criminalizing sexual conduct between members of the same sex. Explain the Supreme Court’s view regarding an individual’s right to reject medical care.
The Right to Privacy • The right to privacy, considered to be part of liberty, is protected by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. • Government action requires adequate substantive justification for taking away a person’s liberty.
Privacy – Test for Constitutionality of Government Action • The right to privacy is a fundamental right, and therefore any government action that infringes upon this right is reviewed under the standard of strict scrutiny. • Four basic questions: • Do the facts present a fundamental right? • Is the fundamental right infringed? • Does the government present a compelling purpose for infringement? • Is the means necessary to achieve the governmental purpose?
The Ninth Amendment • There are no specific (enumerated) Ninth Amendment rights, but the amendment provides the Supreme Court with the justification necessary to protect unenumerated rights, including the right to privacy.
Privacy – Specific Rights • The right to privacy includes many specific rights, including rights relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, abortion, sex, and the right to die.
Right to an Abortion • Although there is a fundamental right to an abortion (Roe v. Wade), there are several special rules regarding this right. • Prior to viability: A woman has a constitutionally protected privacy right to an abortion prior to viability. During this time, a state can place no undue burden on this right. • Waiting period: A 24-hour waiting period is not an undue burden (Planned Parenthood v. Casey). • Parental consent: Requiring a woman under 18 to obtain parental consent is not an undue burden (Planned Parenthood v. Casey). • Spousal consent: Requiring a woman to obtain spousal consent is an undue burden (Planned Parenthood v. Casey) • After viability: There is no fundamental right to an abortion after viability, and states may prohibit abortions unless necessary to protect the woman’s life or health (Stenberg v. Carhart).
Lawrence v. Texas539 U.S. 558 (2003) • Issue: Protected beliefs; conscientious objection to military service. • Held that: • The test of religious belief is whether it is a sincere and meaningful belief occupying in the life of the possessor a place parallel to that filled by God. • This requires no proof of comprehensible religious doctrine.
Goodrich v. Department of Public Health440 Mass. 309 (2003) • Issue: Protected beliefs; conscientious objection to military service. • Held that: • The test of religious belief is whether it is a sincere and meaningful belief occupying in the life of the possessor a place parallel to that filled by God. • This requires no proof of comprehensible religious doctrine.
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health497 U.S. 261 (1990) • Issue: Protected beliefs; conscientious objection to military service. • Held that: • The test of religious belief is whether it is a sincere and meaningful belief occupying in the life of the possessor a place parallel to that filled by God. • This requires no proof of comprehensible religious doctrine.
