griswold v. connecticut, with a seven to two decision, the justices in this case establish a constitutional right to privacy. it's set in motion the expansion of privacy rights that continue till today over the next several decades. to give you a sense of continuing importance in our society, we put together a short video that is a modern-day reference to the grizzle case. >> there is wild v connecticut, which recognized a right to privacy in the constitution -- >> i agree with the griswold v. connecticut that marital privacy extends to contraception -- >> griswold v. connecticut -- griswold v. connecticut -- >> back in this city of connecticut there was a case known as griswold v. connecticut -- >> let's talk a little bit about griswold v. connecticut here. >> >> what is it about griswold v. connecticut that gives it its lasting importance? we will learn about it in the history of this case and the interesting people involved with it. our two guests at the table for the next 90 minutes helen alv

what does griswold do? he protects the underrated right of privacy to use and to possess and to sell contraceptives. the question is what gave the court the power to invalidate a connecticut law to possess and use contraceptives? the answer douglas gave, a good yale man, the answer justice douglas gave was that it was the right of privacy and he relied d on other cases in making that case. at some point, the challenge was raised to him, doesn't this give rise to this economic liberty case like this lochner thing? the court wasn't quite sure what the lochner case was. they thought it had to do with the size of bread. they were not quite sure what the lochner case was. there was a case like that, but it wasn't lochner. so again, lochner has not played a huge role. justice douglas as we were not take the road that was urged upon us to do something like lochner. then where it really comes into play is in gerald gunther's casebook. it was published in 1970. look how recent we are, puts lochner in the case book a

so they decide the griswold case. it's mentioned in the court now because the justice says we're not going to take the road that was urged upon us. now justice douglas mentions lochner. then where it really comes to play is in gerald guenther's play book. this was published in 1970, puts lochner in the case book. and pairs it with griswold as a way of questioning whether what the court is up to is really any different than what it used to do, and then, in 1975 comes the new edition of guenther's book. comes out in 1975, and roe is decided. roe v. wade is decided. now, jerry guenther expands the lochner case to a whole section of the book. it starts with lochner, then it goes through griswold and then it goes through roe. he calls this the lochner era. before 1970, i think there was only one reference to anybody referring to the lochner era as an era. he calls it the lochner era. in 1975, he has this big thing, i think the title of the chapter was substantive due process, rise, decline, and revival. rise, lochner decli

maybe that means that, you know, roe and griswold are okay because lochner is okay, so maybe griswold is okay. actually, i think the sociology was backwards, and that is because a lot of people liked roe and a lot of people liked griswold, when you put lochner up against it, and you say look what they're doing is the same thing as lochner, i think this caused people to rethink lochner. even though lochner was still objectionable, it wasn't for the same reason. it used to be thought to be objectionable because judges were interfering with the political process. now, that's not why it's objecti objectionable. when larry tribe published the first treatise, he has a whole chapter on lochner, and he says the problem with lochner was not that they got the role of judges wrong. the problem with lochner is they were protecting the wrong right. freedom of contract was not a right that they should be protecting. okay. so now, lochner is -- it used to be very, very bad. and now it's only very bad. it used to be the wrong right and the wrong role. now it's the right role but the wrong right. and

jenna griswold, colorado's secretary of state, secretary griswold, thanks very much. >> thank you. >>coronavirus has set a new daily record in texas yesterday. one city hit especially hard is san antonio. its mayor tells us how he is coping with the pandemic. needles. essential for sewing, but maybe not for people with certain inflammatory conditions. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz. the first and only pill of its kind that treats moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or moderate to severe ulcerative colitis when other medicines have not helped enough. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections. before and during treatment, your doctor should check for infections, like tb and do blood tests. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b or c, have flu-like symptoms, or are prone to infections. serious, sometimes fatal infections, cancers including lymphoma, and blood clots have happened. taking a higher than recommended dose of xeljanz for ra may increase risk of death. tears in the stomach or intestines and serious allergic reacti

if this case is rooted in griswold, griswold said the right to privacy pertains to things like contraceptives. isn't it a tremendous stretch to go from, i have the right to buy contraceptives to i have the right to kill an innocent, defenseless child? the question to melissa, and the gentleman, with all due respect, yes or no, do you consider the baby in the mother's womb a human being? the reason why that is so important is because justice blackmun said, if we know that life begins at conception or before birth, we have to revisit this. >> i'm going to let you go because we have a little time and lots of questions on the line. >> just to make clear the bridge between griswold and roe, another case went before the court dealing with contraception. there the court is considering whether the law that prohibits selling contraception to unmarried people is constitutional. the court writes that the right of the individual to decide whether or not to bear or beget a child is the right of the individual, not necessarily a married couple. and griswold goes on to say what is a couple but a collection

i want to get earwin griswold, a position that ted olson held, president nixon kept him on, let's listeno some of his argument. >> but i also think the heart of our case is that publication of the material specified in my closed brief will, as i have tried to argue there, materially affect the supreme court of the united states. it will affect lives, it will affect the process of the determination of the war, it will affect the process of recovering prisoners of war. i cannot say that determination of the war or recovering prisoners of war is something which has an immediate effect on the security of the united states. i say that it has such an effect on the security of the united states that it out to be the basis of an injunction in this case. >> ted olson, what was he saying? >> what he was saying is, i am speaking on behalf of the united states, i am telling you, based upon the material that we have in the possession of the united states, that the publication of this material will damage the united states in various different intangible ways. i can't say that it will have this specif

with me now, colorado secretary of state, jena griswold.ry of state, there are a lot of people who are wondering how their state is going to do this, how they are going to get it right. what lessons canby lea bwe lear colorado? >> well, thank you so much for having me on. i'm really excited for this conversation because colorado does hold the key for voting in november. you know, i think it's worth mentioning that my mom is a nurse and she's been working on a covid unit to save lives and as secretary of state, i really want us to adopt nationally the model that enables us to social distance and have our voices heard. and that's vote by mail for all. colorado's vote-by-mail system works. we just had a record turnout in our state primary and we're ready to share our model with the nation. >> and what does that model look like? tell us. >> so, it is very simple. you register to vote then you are sent a ballot and you can return the ballot either through the mail at a dropbox or even vote in person. i just think it's so important that we expand

and then at 9:35 eastern griswold v. connecticut that was a planned parenthood challenge to an 1879 connecticut law that banned the prescription and use of birth control. the supreme court ultimately ruled the statute to be unconstitutional. watch landmark cases tonight on c-span3 and anytime at c-span.org. >>> live coverage of two key hearings next week. on monday, amazon's jeff bezos, facebook's mark zuckerberg, sundar pichai of google and apple's tim cook appear before the subcommittee on anti-trust, commercial and administrative law, as they examine dominance of online platforms and market power. live coverage begins at monday noon eastern at seespan 2. tuesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, william barr appears before the general oversight of the justice department hearing. watch live hearing coverage monday on c-span 2 and tuesday on c-span3. watch any time on c-span.org or listen on the c-span earlier app. >> kevin mccarthy earlier today held a news conference at the capitol and talked about the upcoming house agenda and

and then at 9:35 eastern griswold versus connecticut. this case of the planned parenthood -- connecticut state law that banned the prescription and use

board of education which desegregated schools and griswold v. connecticut which established a constitutional right of privacy. he also talked about the chief justice's earlier years as attorney general and governor of california. c-span recorded this event at duke law school in 2007. >> it's a tremendous pleasure to introduce a dear friend of mine, jim newton, who is the author of a splendid new biography "justice for all, earl warren and the nation he made." jim is a reporter and a bureau chief at los angeles times, where he's been for over 20 years. i first really became familiar with his writing in the early 1990s when he was the lead reporter for the l.a. times covering the trial of the officers who beat rodney king and then the o.j. simpson case. i was always dazzled by his writing, his ability to take a day of complex events in a courtroom and summarize it concisely and clearly. he always wrote with amazing speed and great elegance. i got to know him in another capacity in the late 1990s when he was covering the charter reform process in l

and then at 9:35 eastern griswold v. connecticut that banned the prescription and use of birth control. the supreme court ultimately ruled the statute to be unconstitutional. watch landmark cases tonight on c-span 3 and anytime at c-span.org. >> american history tv on c-span 3 exploring the people and events that tell the american story every weekend. coming up this weekend, saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history we look back to 2012 and hear from phyllis about the roots and modern-curve movement. and four police training films from the 19:60s. at 6:00 p.m. eastern on american artifacts a tour of the ellis island immigration muse. ch and at 7:00 p.m. eastern historians talk about recent debates over removing historical monuments. exploring the american story. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span 3. >> live now to capitol hill for a house hearing on what's being done to reopen schools during the coronavirus pandemic.

>> reporter: for the aspiring clark griswolds of the world -- >> there are some silver linings when itavel in a post covid-19 world, right? >> there are. typically we can't book flexible travel because it's too expensive. refundable tickets are the most expensive. but there are actually deals out there. not just 40% to 50% off hotel rates but also free cancelation and flexible policies that we've never really seen at this level before. >> reporter: so maybe a good way to cure the quarantine blues is to book some flexible travel. >> expedia is seeing exciting news as far as where we can travel and still get a deal. >> reporter: first stop -- >> fantastic las vegas! >> so what we're seeing is las vegas has opened their doors to travelers and some incredible discounts await. four-star hotels like the cosmopolitan are looking like a 20% off discount, so you can stay for as low as $173 a night for a studio with a terrace. this is peak season summer so you have to remember, these are fantastic rates. the aria is a five-star resort and we're seeing rates as low as $99 in august. that's optimi

and then at 9:35 eastern griswold versus connecticut. this case of the planned parenthood -- connecticut state law that banned the prescription and use of birth control. the supreme court ultimately room the statute to be unconstitutional. watch landmark cases tonight on c-span three and anytime at c-span.org. >> the senate intelligence committee met to consider the nominations of christopher miller to be the director of the national counter-terrorism center and peter to be the general counsel to the office of the director of national intelligence. the two nominees were asked about russian election interference, interrogation tactics, the fisa application process and whistleblower protections. they were also questions related to the recent deployment of federal law enforcement agents and u.s. cities experiencing ongoing protests. >> this hearing will enable the committee to have a thoughtful and deliberate consideration and qualifications for the position that you have been respected lee nominated to fill. the witnesses have provided woo

griswold versus connecticut, became fundamental in the roe v. wade situation. executive privilege in the case of the nixon tapes is not absolute. u.s. v. winder is, defense of marriage act in 2013 is unconstitutional, and most recently, last year, king v. burrwall, which is the health care review. marbury v. madison has long tentacles in the court. amy mulligan asks, should we as americans be concerned about judicial review becoming judicial activism? >> well, the very important point is that judicial review is an essential cornerstone of our system. former chief justice rehnquist said it was the greatest gift americans gave to the science of government and it is a very, very important principle, but that doesn't mean we're all going to agree on how that power of review is exercised, and there are going to be and there should be healthy disagreements about that. and frequently if somebody doesn't like the outcome of a decision of the supreme court that invalidates an action that is unconstitutional, they view that as judicial activism from whichever perspective

>> justice black was fighting a noble battle and dissented also in the griswold case because he didn't like the court making up privacy rights. he was a liberal originalist and the current originalists disagree. alito said the framers didn't think about gps devices. there were none. scalia said yes but there is an analog, a tiny constable hiding under the carriage at the time of the drafting and eavesdropping. you need a thousand constables that have to be very small constables or a very large carriage. here you have the two conservative justices one an originalist the other not agreeing the fourth amendment applied but not for the same reason and justice black was toward the end of his career and being very rigid -- he wasn't able to see conversations as digital effects and for that reason wrote a noble but not in the end very influential dissent. >> let's look at a number of headlines. from december, 1967 on the decision in this case "the los angeles times" headlines "supreme court rules bugging is subject to legal safeguards" and in the "new york times" "high court eases curbs on bu

board of education which desegregated schools and griswold v.necticut which established a constitutional right of privacy. he also talked about

this started with griswold v connecticut.ontraceptive rights was something unheard-of prior to that. this was not a legal right. this should not happen. of biden and his business pro-choice catholics, that is an oxymoron. there is no such thing. if you are pro-abortion, for the killing of prenatal lives, you are no longer in factoid a member of the roman catholic christian church. that needs to be said very loudly. that collar is absolutely completely off the rails. many bishops around the country have for bid in joe biden from receiving the eucharist because he holds positions absolutely antithetical to those of the roman catholic church. host: the case was little sisters of the poor versus pennsylvania. pennsylvania's bob casey with the tweet, "today's decision is a gross misinterpretation of the affordable care act and will disproportionately impact low-wage workers, people of color and lgbtq people who are already facing barriers. no private employer has the right to deny access to health care, that includes birth control

wade is, rooted in griswold, and griswold said the right to privacy pertained to things like contraceptives. isn't it a tremendous stretch to go from i have the right to buy a contraceptive to i have the right to kill an innocent, defenseless child? now the question for melissa, and the gentleman, with all due respect, yes or no, do you consider the baby in a mother's womb a human being? and the reason why that's so important is because justice blackmun said if we know life begins at conception, or before birth, we have to revisit this. and -- i'm going to let you go with that point because we have a little time and lots of questions on the line. >> so, just to make clear the bridge between grizzled and roe, in 1972, just a row -- dealing with contraception, is called ice instead versus baird. the court there is considering before massachusetts law that prevents the use of -- and the court, in an opinion by brennan, i believe, writes that the right of the individual to decide whether or not to get -- the married couple contemplated in griswold, and it goes on to say what is the very couple