AP U.S. Government 3.1 Institutions of National Government

AP U.S. Government 3.1 Institutions of National Government. In what case did the Court hold that there was a Constitutional right to marital privacy?

AP U.S. GovernmentInstitutions of National Government
AP U.S. Government and PoliticsConstitutional Underpinnings
Constitutional UnderpinningsConstitution
LanguageEnglish Language

Transcript

00:26

court often finds itself ruling on issues that aren't explicitly

00:29

mentioned in the constitution especially since the document was written

00:33

well over two hundred twenty five years ago Privacy just

00:36

so happens to fall in that category as do cell

00:38

phones televisions and believe it or not sketchy used car

00:42

salesmen seriously shmoop the united states wikipedia check it out

00:47

All right did the supreme court hold there was a

00:49

constitutional right to marital privacy in a miranda v arizona

00:53

ever heard the term miranda rights Like if we get

00:56

arrested in the cops say you have the right to

00:57

remain silent Not that we've been arrested or anything but

01:00

we've just watched a lot of law and order really

01:03

in miranda v arizona supreme court held that arrested person

01:07

must be informed of their legal rights They don't do

01:10

that can't arrest him So we have the right to

01:13

remain skeptical of a could the court have ruled on

01:16

a constitutional right to marital privacy in be gideon v

01:19

wainwright Okay more law and order stuff we're all familiar

01:23

with the whole you have a right to an attorney

01:24

and if you can't afford one One will be provided

01:27

for you think right right Well that's from gideon v

01:29

rain right which required that people accused of felonies be

01:33

provided a lawyer by the government if they couldn't afford

01:36

to pay for one Well sounds like a great deal

01:38

except for the whole thing being accused of a felony

01:41

part So yeah that didn't work so well Was the

01:45

constitutional right to marital privacy addressed Indeed Gonzalez first Carhartt

01:49

Well not quite Gonzalez v carhart up held two thousand

01:52

three's partial birth abortion ban act a measure of the

01:55

more conservative leanings of the roberts court What about you

02:00

westbury of the sanders Well westbury v sanders dealt with

02:03

the whole one man one vote principle which basically means

02:06

that if we live in a smaller district with the

02:08

same number of representatives as a larger district our vote

02:12

would well technically count more so we can redraw the

02:15

case against e as well Not eat Okay which means

02:19

the court held there was a constitutional right to marital

02:22

privacy under c griswald v connecticut Right Well griswold v

02:27

connecticut struck down a state ban on contraceptives saying that

02:31

married couples had a right to do whatever they wanted

02:34

in the bedroom That basically boil down to a constitutional

02:36

right to privacy even though privacy isn't explicitly mentioned in

02:41

the constitution so c is the correct answer Griswald was

02:44

a major case under the liberal leaning lauren court which

02:48

also sought to reverse racial discrimination and increased legal protection

02:52

for minorities It's like there weren't many issues left on 00:02:56.21 --> [endTime] the table there