Nine Justices in Search of a Doctrine

Emerson, Thomas I.

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 64

First Page: 219

Year: 1965

Bluebook Citation: 64 MICH. L. REV. 219 (1965)

Author: Thomas I. Emerson: all 35 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
1
Citing decision
1
Courts citing
Most recently cited by1
  • 1971Opinions of the Justices to the House of Representatives Mass.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

To the ordinary layman, Griswold v. Connecticut seemed easy. But to the lawyer it was somewhat more difficult. The lawyer's problem with the case was that the issues did not readily fit into any existing legal pigeonhole. Actually, there were five possibilities.

The case could have been dealt with under the equal protection clause, the first amendment, substantive due process, the right of privacy, or, in extremis, the ninth amendment. In order to strike down the statute under any of these doctrines, however, the Court would be forced to enter uncharted waters. Whatever course the Court took, its action was bound to be pregnant with possibilities crucial to the development of the law in a vital area of American life.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.