4. The case involved a Connecticut "Comstock law" that prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of … The Appellants, Griswold and Buxton (Appellants), were fined for violating Connecticut law forbidding the use of contraceptives. Summary of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Relevant Facts: Griswold was the Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut.

Griswold served as Executive Director. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood of Connecticut and its medical director, Griswold. Griswold and Buxton challenged the convictions and brought suit against Connecticut, (plaintiff), alleging that the statutes violated the Fourteenth Amendment. 2. Griswold and Buxton challenged the convictions and brought suit against Connecticut, (plaintiff), alleging that the statutes violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Dr. Burton ischief of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Yale Medical School, and one ofthe leading authorities in his field. This article discusses the landmark reproductive rights case and its material impact on such … From their small, under-funded birth control clinic at 406 Orange Street, New Haven, a blue- blooded social reformer and a shy medical doctor decided in 1961 to become criminals by dispensing contraceptives to married couples.
Griswold v. Connecticut Case Brief. No. Facts. The Appellate Division of the Circuit Court affirmed their … Griswold contends that the statute violates the 14th Amendment. He was convicted under a Connecticut statute that made it a crime to assist our counsel someone for the purpose of preventing conception.

Jun 7, 1965. Griswold and her colleague were convicted under a Connecticut law which criminalized the provision of counselling, and other medical treatment, to … In Griswold, the Court ruled that a Connecticut law banning the sale of contraceptives, even to married couples, was unconstitutional. Tony Rollo/Newsweek Griswold v. Connecticut.

Sometimes there may be only one legal issue). The Supreme Court concluded that the law that had resulted in criminal liability for the appellants violated the right to privacy included in the … Argued March 29, 1965. Order Essay. Griswold v. Connecticut Case Brief - Rule of Law: The right of a married couple to privacy is protected by the Constitution.

This 1965 case is important to feminism because it emphasizes privacy, control over one's personal life and freedom from government intrusion in relationships. Syllabus ; View Case ; Appellant Estelle T. Griswold, et al.
Appellee State of Connecticut . Griswold and her colleague were convicted under a … Appellants, v. STATE OF CONNECTICUT. Procedural Posture: The state appellate courts affirmed. Decided by Warren Court . Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction. Statement of the Facts: Buxton, a licensed doctor and Yale professor, served as Director for the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. Both she and the Medical Director for the League gave information, instruction, and other medical advice to married couples concerning birth control. Docket no. In the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling in 1965, the court decided in favor of allowing married couples to use contraception, a precedent-setting decision. The U.S. Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut struck down a law that prohibited birth control. 2d 510, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 2282 (U.S. June 7, 1965) Brief Fact Summary. Mar 29 - 30, 1965. Citation 381 US 479 (1965) Argued. One of those victories came 50 years ago this Sunday, on June 7, 1965, when the Supreme Court handed down a decisive win for contraception access in Griswold v. Connecticut.