The ninth amendment By: Arturo C.

The 9th amendment Basically protects the people's rights that are not specifically listed in the constitution. For instance the most controversial one being the right to privacy.

Griswold v. Connecticut "The 1965 U.S. Supreme Court case of Griswold v Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), challenged Connecticut’s 1879 law prohibiting the use of “any drug, medicinal article, or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception.” Estelle Griswold, Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, and Dr. Charles Lee Buxton, opened a birth control clinic in New Haven. The pair were arrested, tried, and convicted of offering services to prevent conception, and fined."

Background info. In the 1833 landmark Supreme Court case Barron v Baltimore, the Court ruled that the Ninth Amendment pertained to the federal courts only, and not to the state level of government. Basically, that meant that, originally, the Amendment protected the rights of the people from expanding power of the federal government, which is a government of “enumerated powers.”

In the 1920s, the Supreme Court has regarded the right to privacy as a guarantee of the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment. When it comes to the Ninth Amendment, the court system is bound by a guide led by basic common sense. Since there is not written foundations for interpreting the rights covered in the amendment, it is up to the court to decide what is and what is not covered. In general, the amendment is regarded as a preventative measure to keep the government from expanding its powers when concerning the rights of the people. Since there is much controversy, even among leaders in the court systems, there has never been a judicial decision made on the basis of the amendment alone. The amendment has simply been cited in certain cases. Due to the lack of cases in which the amendment has been used as a basis for, it is sometimes referred to as “the silent amendment.”

Griswold v. Connecticut Griswold appealed the case, which had been upheld in both the appellate court and Connecticut Supreme Court, to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the state law against the use of contraceptives violated the Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Supreme Court decision The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Connecticut law was unconstitutional, as it violated the “right to marital privacy.” The 7-2 decision pointed out that, although the Bill of Rights does not specifically mention “privacy,” it is inherent and implied in other protections provided by the Constitution, and that the right to privacy is seen as a right of individuals to be protected against governmental intrusion into their lives.

Similar case United States v. Vuitch (1971): Milan Vuitch, a physician, was charged in an indictment for producing and attempting to produce abortions in violation of the District of Columbia abortion statute. The federal district court dismissed the charges, holding that the statute was unconstitutionally vague.The ruling for the Supreme Court was a five-four vote and the court said the statue that the indictment was based on is invalid.