Also known as: right to privacy · privacy right · privacy rights · constitutional privacy
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A fundamental constitutional protection that shields intimate personal decisions from undue governmental interference. It arises from penumbras of specific Bill of Rights guarantees and applies to choices involving marriage and contraception. Regulations that substantially obstruct access to contraceptives for adults or minors are subject to heightened scrutiny.
Piper Patel, a married adult, tries to buy emergency contraceptives at a retail store near her home. The state rule forces all such purchases through licensed pharmacists only. The restriction delays her access and raises costs without any health-based justification tied to the product itself. A court invalidates the rule because it unduly burdens the fundamental privacy right to obtain contraceptives.
Penelope Price and her husband seek to use contraceptives in their marriage. State law prohibits their use by married couples and imposes criminal penalties. The couple sues, arguing the ban invades their intimate marital decisions. A court strikes down the statute because it violates the constitutional zone of privacy surrounding marriage.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Preston Pratt places a call from a public phone booth and discusses personal financial matters. Government agents record the conversation without a warrant by attaching a device to the booth. Pratt moves to suppress the recording. The court holds that he enjoyed a reasonable expectation of privacy in the call, so the warrantless recording violated the Fourth Amendment.
Peter Park lawfully receives a tape of a private phone conversation between two union officials discussing sensitive negotiations. He broadcasts excerpts on his radio show. The officials sue for damages under a state wiretap statute. The court rules that the First Amendment protects the broadcast because the information concerned a matter of public concern and Park played no role in the illegal interception.
Priya Prasad, a pregnant woman in her first trimester, seeks an abortion at a licensed clinic. State law criminalizes the procedure except to save the mother's life. She challenges the statute in federal court. The court holds that the law violates her fundamental right to privacy in reproductive decisions during the early stages of pregnancy.
Pierre Poulin, a newspaper reporter, obtains the name of a sexual assault victim from a publicly released police report. The paper publishes the name in an article about the crime. The victim sues the paper for invasion of privacy under state law. The court holds that the First Amendment bars liability because the information came from official public records.
Yes. The Constitution recognizes a fundamental privacy right in decisions about contraception. Regulations that substantially limit convenient access for adults or impose physician-approval barriers on minors are subject to heightened scrutiny and are typically invalid.
Supporting sources
Heightened scrutiny applies. The Constitution protects a marital zone of privacy that includes decisions about contraception. Rules that single out married couples or condition access on marital status must be narrowly tailored to a compelling interest.
Supporting sources
No. Such a requirement unduly burdens the fundamental privacy right to obtain contraceptives. The restriction must be justified by more than general health concerns when it significantly limits access for adults.
Supporting sources
…from searches and seizures protected by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which the Court has referred to as embodying a right to privacy. Katz v. United States , 389 U. S. 347 (1967). If the Court means by the term "privacy" no more than that the claim of a person to be free from unwanted state regulation of consensual…