The Supreme Court
.docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
PL102
Subject
Political Science
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by BarristerCloverNewt6 on coursehero.com
The Supreme Court's recognition of a fundamental right to privacy and its subsequent
rulings on specific issues such as the right to use contraceptives, the right to abort an unborn
child, the right to engage in various sexual acts, and the right to same-sex marriage are rooted in
the concept of substantive due process. The Court has held that while the U.S. Constitution does
not explicitly mention a right to privacy, it can be inferred from the penumbras and emanations
of other constitutional provisions, such as the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth
Amendments.
In terms of the separation of powers established by the U.S. Constitution, the Court's role
is to interpret and apply the law, including the Constitution. The power of judicial review, as
established in Marbury v. Madison, allows the Court to determine the constitutionality of laws
and government actions. While some critics argue that the Court has overstepped its bounds by
creating substantive rights not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, others argue that the
evolving nature of constitutional interpretation is necessary to address contemporary issues.
The recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
(2022) addresses abortion rights and is relevant to the discussion. In Dobbs, the Court upheld a
Mississippi law that banned most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The decision did not
explicitly overturn the landmark case of Roe v. Wade but signaled a shift in the Court's approach
to abortion rights. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, expressed a
willingness to reconsider the viability standard established in Roe and Planned Parenthood v.
Casey.
The impact of Dobbs on the separation of powers and the Court's approach to substantive
due process can be interpreted in several ways. Some argue that the Court is respecting the
principle of judicial restraint and allowing the democratic process to address controversial issues
through legislation. Others contend that the Court is maintaining its role as a guardian of
individual rights and liberties by scrutinizing the constitutional basis of laws restricting access to
abortion.
In terms of separation of church and state, the Court's decisions on issues related to
privacy, including reproductive rights and same-sex marriage, have often been framed as
protecting individual autonomy and preventing the imposition of religious beliefs on personal
matters. Critics argue that some decisions, like Roe v. Wade, were wrongly decided and that the
Court's expansion of privacy rights has gone beyond the intentions of the Founding Fathers.
In conclusion, the question of whether the Supreme Court acted properly in recognizing
fundamental rights of privacy involves a nuanced analysis of constitutional interpretation,
separation of powers, and the evolving nature of societal values. The recent Dobbs decision adds
a layer of complexity to this discussion, signaling a potential reevaluation of the Court's
approach to substantive due process and the protection of individual liberties.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help