. In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court was considered an activist court because...
I know that it has everything to do with the privacy law. I am stuck between two answer from the multiple choice. please help.
Not enough information here.
http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/rule-of-law/judicial-activism/cases/griswold-v-connecticut
To understand why the Supreme Court was considered an activist court in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, it is important to first grasp the background and context of the case. Griswold v. Connecticut, decided in 1965, involved a Connecticut law that criminalized the use of contraceptives, even by married couples. Estelle Griswold, the executive director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, opened a birth control clinic that challenged the constitutionality of the law.
The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, held that the Connecticut law violated the right to marital privacy, which was found within the "penumbras" and "emanations" of other constitutional rights, such as the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments. The Court concluded that the right to privacy was implicit within the protections of the Constitution.
Now, addressing your question about why the Court was considered activist in this case, it is important to note that the term "judicial activism" can be subjective and interpreted differently by different individuals. However, in the context of Griswold v. Connecticut, some argue that the Court was activist because it expanded the scope of constitutional protections to include an explicit right to privacy, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.
The Court's decision in Griswold was seen as an expansion of judicial power, as it involved, to some extent, creating new rights and interpreting the Constitution in a broader sense. This was seen by some as an example of the Court injecting its own policy preferences into the law, rather than strictly adhering to the original intent or text of the Constitution.
Therefore, the answer to your question is that the Supreme Court was considered an activist court in Griswold v. Connecticut because it expanded the notion of privacy rights beyond the explicit text of the Constitution, thus broadening constitutional protections and intervening in social policy matters.
Please note that understanding judicial activism is a complex topic, and different interpretations and perspectives exist. It is always important to consider multiple viewpoints and engage in further research to form a comprehensive understanding.