4 ms·

>Now that the supreme court eliminated our right to privacy As a not usa person, can you explain/ link to?

loxias 4y ago
In the Constitution there is not a right to privacy explicitly guaranteed, however for more than a century there is an implicit right to privacy which can be derived from aspects of the Constitution and is supported by court cases. Griswold v Connecticut, the SCOTUS case which ruled that Americans have a right to purchase birth control without the government getting involved cited the 4th amendment, protection against unreasonable searches. The 3rd amendment guarantees the privacy of your home for housing troops. The 9th amendment says non enumerated rights default to the people, which has also been interpreted as a right to privacy. SCOTUS in Griswold has also agreed that the due process clause of the 14th, which prohibits "[deprivation] of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" provides a right to privacy. However, thanks to a failed reality TV star, the current 6-3 conservative YOLO court has thrown precedent out the window, picking outcomes first and then backsolving arguments to arrive at the desired result. Stare Decisis is for suckers, and a newly emboldened Alito instead makes decisions on the basis of what (or what not) is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" as opposed to, for example, logical reasoning and precedent. TL;DR: In overturning Roe v. Wade -- the lifetime goal of the conservative movement -- the Supreme Court also broke a whole bunch of other shit. Internal consistency is no longer a requirement for SCOTUS rulings.
SamReidHughes 4y ago
There isn't any reality behind that statement, it's somebody with an axe to grind because Roe v. Wade (the abortion ruling that discovered a right to privacy in the bill of rights to get the outcome the justices wanted) got overturned.
- loxias 4y ago
  So, first you say: > There isn't any reality behind that statement, it's somebody with an axe to grind And then you hilariously say: > discovered a right to privacy in the bill of rights to get the outcome the justices wanted There is absolutely no reality behind that statement, you're just someone with an axe to grind. Bro. Did you even read Griswold (which is a completely different case than Roe)? Also, are you just gonna throw all penumbras out? This shit's been around since the 19th century. If not guaranteed by the 1st, 4th, and 9th the 14th adds it. Oh look, here's the right to privacy again: https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy/Privacy_brand_warr2.html https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/priv... It's from 1890 in the notoriously disreputable HARVARD LAW REVIEW.
  - SamReidHughes 4y ago
    Griswold made up a right to "marital privacy" (which may exist, but the application to birth control is a reach).
- yawpitch 4y ago
  You can’t “discover” a right in the Bill of Rights, since the 9th Amendment makes it explicitly clear that any right NOT mentioned in the Bill is still a right held by the people. In other words if you think the only rights you have are those enumerated in the Bill of Rights, then you either haven’t read or understood the Bill of Rights.
  - SamReidHughes 4y ago
    What makes you think the 9th amendment is binding on the states?

In the Constitution there is not a right to privacy explicitly guaranteed, however for more than a century there is an implicit right to privacy which can be derived from aspects of the Constitution and is supported by court cases. Griswold v Connecticut, the SCOTUS case which ruled that Americans have a right to purchase birth control without the government getting involved cited the 4th amendment, protection against unreasonable searches. The 3rd amendment guarantees the privacy of your home for housing troops. The 9th amendment says non enumerated rights default to the people, which has also been interpreted as a right to privacy. SCOTUS in Griswold has also agreed that the due process clause of the 14th, which prohibits "[deprivation] of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" provides a right to privacy. However, thanks to a failed reality TV star, the current 6-3 conservative YOLO court has thrown precedent out the window, picking outcomes first and then backsolving arguments to arrive at the desired result. Stare Decisis is for suckers, and a newly emboldened Alito instead makes decisions on the basis of what (or what not) is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" as opposed to, for example, logical reasoning and precedent. TL;DR: In overturning Roe v. Wade -- the lifetime goal of the conservative movement -- the Supreme Court also broke a whole bunch of other shit. Internal consistency is no longer a requirement for SCOTUS rulings.

SamReidHughes 4y ago

There isn't any reality behind that statement, it's somebody with an axe to grind because Roe v. Wade (the abortion ruling that discovered a right to privacy in the bill of rights to get the outcome the justices wanted) got overturned.

loxias 4y ago
So, first you say: > There isn't any reality behind that statement, it's somebody with an axe to grind And then you hilariously say: > discovered a right to privacy in the bill of rights to get the outcome the justices wanted There is absolutely no reality behind that statement, you're just someone with an axe to grind. Bro. Did you even read Griswold (which is a completely different case than Roe)? Also, are you just gonna throw all penumbras out? This shit's been around since the 19th century. If not guaranteed by the 1st, 4th, and 9th the 14th adds it. Oh look, here's the right to privacy again: https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy/Privacy_brand_warr2.html https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/priv... It's from 1890 in the notoriously disreputable HARVARD LAW REVIEW.
- SamReidHughes 4y ago
  Griswold made up a right to "marital privacy" (which may exist, but the application to birth control is a reach).
yawpitch 4y ago
You can’t “discover” a right in the Bill of Rights, since the 9th Amendment makes it explicitly clear that any right NOT mentioned in the Bill is still a right held by the people. In other words if you think the only rights you have are those enumerated in the Bill of Rights, then you either haven’t read or understood the Bill of Rights.
- SamReidHughes 4y ago
  What makes you think the 9th amendment is binding on the states?