The Constitution And Privacy: What's The Connection?

While the word privacy is not mentioned in the US Constitution, the Supreme Court has inferred it from the language of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The Supreme Court first formally identified the concept of decisional privacy in 1965, saying it was implied from other explicit constitutional rights. The right to privacy has been used to protect a range of individual liberties, including the right to have an abortion, the right to privacy in marriage, and the right to privacy in medical decision-making. The Supreme Court has also extended the right to privacy to persons of the same sex [who choose to] engage in...sexual conduct. While the right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it is a fundamental principle that underlies many constitutional protections for sensitive and intimate activities.

Explore related products

The Poverty of Privacy Rights

$21.85 $26

Griswold v. Connecticut: Birth Control and the Constitutional Right of Privacy (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

$24.99 $29.99

Seek and Hide: The Tangled History of the Right to Privacy

$15.99 $30

On Privacy and Technology

$18.83 $24.95

American Constitutional Law, Volume II: The Bill of Rights and Subsequent Amendments

$104.89 $150

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

Privacy in the Constitution is inferred from the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments

The US Constitution does not explicitly mention a right to privacy. However, the Supreme Court has inferred this right from the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments.

The First Amendment contains a freedom to associate privately, and protects the privacy of the home. The Third and Fourth Amendments protect the sanctity of private homes, with the Fourth Amendment explicitly affirming the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures". The Fifth Amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination allows an accused person to keep information private, and the Ninth Amendment reserves to the people any rights not named in the Bill of Rights.

In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court found a right to privacy, derived from the penumbras of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. The Court used the personal protections expressly stated in these amendments to find that there is an implied right to privacy in the Constitution. The Court found that when the penumbras are taken together, the Constitution creates a "zone of privacy".

In Eisenstadt v. Baird (1971) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court extended the right to privacy, relying upon the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process. The Court held that "the petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives".

The right to privacy was also central to Roe v. Wade, where the Court used the right, derived from the Fourteenth Amendment, to extend the right to encompass an individual's right to have an abortion. However, this was later overturned in the Dobbs decision.

The Fourteenth Amendment extends privacy rights to unmarried couples and same-sex couples

The Constitution of the United States does not explicitly mention a right to privacy. However, the Supreme Court has inferred this right from the language of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. The Fourteenth Amendment, which addresses citizenship rights and equal protection under the law, has been pivotal in extending privacy rights to unmarried and same-sex couples.

In Eisenstadt v. Baird (1971), the Supreme Court extended the right to privacy to unmarried couples, ruling that the right "inheres in the individual, not the marital couple." This decision was based on the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process, which protects individuals against arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property. The Court held that the right to privacy was broad enough to encompass an individual's private life, including the right to purchase contraceptives.

In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court relied on the Fourteenth Amendment to extend privacy rights to same-sex couples. The Court ruled that "persons of the same sex [who choose to] engage in... sexual conduct" are entitled to respect for their private lives. This decision affirmed the fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, which include intimate choices defining personal identity, dignity, autonomy, and beliefs.

In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Supreme Court further extended the right to marry to same-sex couples under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court ruled that the Amendment requires states to license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex, regardless of where the marriage was lawfully performed. This decision was based on the understanding that marriage is central to personal identity, dignity, and autonomy, and that state bans on same-sex marriage infringe on these fundamental rights.

The Fourteenth Amendment has played a crucial role in expanding privacy rights to unmarried and same-sex couples, ensuring that individuals are protected from government interference in their private lives and intimate choices. These rulings have contributed to a more inclusive and equitable society that respects the dignity and autonomy of all individuals.

The right to privacy is not absolute, as citizens cannot commit crimes in their own homes

The right to privacy is considered a fundamental human right, essential to our understanding of freedom. While the US Constitution does not explicitly mention the right to privacy, the Supreme Court has inferred it from the language of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. The Court's interpretation of these amendments led to the creation of a zone of privacy or a right to be "let alone".

The right to privacy is not absolute, and citizens cannot use their homes as a shield to commit crimes. For example, citizens cannot commit murder or molest a child in the privacy of their own homes. The government may also interfere in citizens' private lives in certain circumstances, such as in cases of child abuse or when there is probable cause to search a home.

The Third Amendment, for instance, restrains the government from housing soldiers in private homes, while the Fourth Amendment protects homeowners from unreasonable searches and seizures, requiring a properly approved warrant based on probable cause. These amendments provide a degree of protection against government intrusion, but they do not grant citizens absolute privacy.

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in interpreting and extending the right to privacy. In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Court recognised the right to privacy, derived from the penumbras of other explicitly stated constitutional protections. The Court's decision in Eisenstadt v. Baird (1971) extended the right to privacy to unmarried couples purchasing contraceptives, and in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to extend privacy rights to same-sex couples engaging in sexual conduct.

While the right to privacy is not absolute, it is a constantly evolving concept, with new technologies and social values shaping our understanding of this fundamental right.

Explore related products

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Privacy: What Everyone Needs to Know®

$9.99 $16.95

The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age

$17.95 $17.19

The Right of Publicity: Privacy Reimagined for a Public World

$44

Intellectual Privacy: Rethinking Civil Liberties in the Digital Age

$24.69 $31.99

The Future of Foreign Intelligence: Privacy and Surveillance in a Digital Age (Inalienable Rights)

$28.77 $37.99

The Supreme Court recognised the right to privacy in 1965, known as decisional privacy

The right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution. However, in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court first recognised an "implied right to privacy" in the Constitution. This case established the precedent for decisional privacy, also known as the right to be let alone, which has been extended and upheld in subsequent Supreme Court decisions.

In Griswold, the Supreme Court found that the Constitution creates a zone of privacy derived from the penumbras of other explicitly stated constitutional protections. Specifically, the Court interpreted the personal protections guaranteed by the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments as creating an implied right to privacy. This implied right to privacy was then used to find a right to privacy for married couples regarding contraception, which was extended to unmarried couples in Eisenstadt v. Baird (1971).

The Griswold decision laid the foundation for a series of landmark cases on individual freedoms related to sex, marriage, and family. For example, in Roe v. Wade, the Court used the right to privacy derived from the Fourteenth Amendment to protect an individual's right to have an abortion. Similarly, in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Court relied on the Fourteenth Amendment to extend the right to privacy to "persons of the same sex [who choose to] engage in... sexual conduct."

While the right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the various Amendments has established a strong precedent for protecting individuals' privacy and their right to make decisions without governmental interference. This interpretation of decisional privacy, first recognised in 1965, has had a significant impact on the evolution of privacy rights in the United States.

Privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but it is a foundation of constitutional law

The right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has inferred it from the language of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. The Fourteenth Amendment has also been used in privacy cases post-Griswold, such as Roe v. Wade, where the Court extended the right to privacy to encompass an individual's right to have an abortion.

The Supreme Court first formally identified the concept of "decisional privacy" in 1965, saying it was implied from other explicit constitutional rights. For example, the First Amendment rights to speech and assembly allow people to privately decide what they will say and with whom they will associate. The right to privacy is also connected to the right to informational privacy, which lets a person limit government disclosure of information about them.

The right to privacy is fundamental to our understanding of freedom. In the 18th century, privacy meant the right to be secure in one's home, safe from the powers of government. This understanding is encapsulated in the common law phrase, "a man's home is his castle."

Privacy rights are inherently intertwined with information technology. As technology has advanced, the need for updated privacy laws and new acts to deal with new situations has become increasingly important. For example, data protection is a significant concern, especially in relation to big tech companies and government agencies that can learn about our online activities.

The right to privacy is also a foundation of constitutional law in other countries, such as Canada and China.

Frequently asked questions