Common Dreams NewsCenter

We Can't Do It Without You!

Home | About Us | Donate | Signup | Archives | Search

Home > Progressive Community > NewsWire > For Immediate Release
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
People for the American Way

JUNE 7, 2005
11:12 AM

CONTACT: People for the American Way
Priscilla Ring or Nick Berning

40th Anniversary of Griswald Highlights Threat to Privacy Rights from Future Supreme Court Nominees
Far-Right Justices Reject Constitutional Right to Privacy

WASHINGTON - June 7 - Today, forty years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, Americans’ privacy rights are threatened by legal and political efforts to dismantle constitutional protections for privacy in the most intimate decisions facing individuals and families. The Griswold case, which overturned a state ban on the sale of contraceptives to married couples, established a foundation for other rulings protecting the right to privacy, including Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas. The Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v Connecticut on June 7, 1965.

“Most Americans would find it unthinkable that their state government could make it illegal for married couples to use contraceptives,” said Ralph G. Neas, president of People For the American Way Foundation. “But the unthinkable could be at hand if the radical right has its way with American courts. Griswold and other decisions protecting Americans’ privacy rights could be overturned if the Supreme Court is filled with justices who don’t believe the Constitution protects individuals from the prying eyes of government, even in our bedrooms.”

Neas noted that Republican Senator Rick Santorum, the Senate Majority Whip, has said that a constitutional right to privacy “undermine[s] the family” and that “…this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold….”

Neas said PFAWF’s recently updated Courting Disaster makes it clear that Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas – cited by President Bush as his models for future nominees – have been extremely hostile to the Roe and Lawrence decisions, and argue that there is no constitutional right to privacy.

“Americans are growing increasingly wary of the radical right’s bid for absolute power,” said Neas. “We saw it in the bid to eliminate checks and balances in the Senate. We saw it in the efforts by politicians to order federal courts to interfere with wrenching family decisions in the Terry Schiavo case. And when the next vacancy occurs on the U.S. Supreme Court, we will see it in far-right demands for Justices who will eliminate the right to privacy and other legal protections Americans cherish.”

For more information about the risk to privacy and other rights and legal protections from future Supreme Court nominees, see


Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
Common Dreams NewsCenter is a non-profit news service
providing breaking news and views for the Progressive Community.

The press release posted here has been provided to Common Dreams NewsWire by one of the many progressive organizations who make up America's Progressive Community. If you wish to comment on this press release or would like more information, please contact the organization directly.
*all times Eastern US (GMT-5:00)

Making News?
Read our Guidelines for Submitting News Releases is an Internet-based progressive news and grassroots activism organization, founded in 1997.
We are a nonprofit, progressive, independent and nonpartisan organization.

Home | About Us | Donate | Signup | Archives | Search

To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.