美國法對隱私權(quán)的確認(rèn)——格里斯沃德訴康涅狄格州案
發(fā)布時間：2019-04-04 10:29
【摘要】：本案兩位上訴人分別是康涅狄格州計劃生育委員會的執(zhí)行理事和他的醫(yī)療理事(一位有執(zhí)業(yè)資格的內(nèi)科醫(yī)生),他們均作為從犯在該州受到了指控,理由為:他們向已婚婦女提供關(guān)于避孕的知識和醫(yī)療建議,以及通過檢測后向部分婦女開具處方,并提供女用避孕用具與材料等行為。這是因為根據(jù)康涅狄格州的制定法,向任何人提供任何避孕藥物或用具的行為都屬犯罪行為。兩位上訴人均訴稱,這種用以認(rèn)定從犯的、適用于本案的制定法違反了憲法第十四修正案。然而經(jīng)過州層面的兩次審理,先是康涅狄格州中級上訴法院認(rèn)定了上訴人有罪,此后州最高法院也維持了原判。最終,美國聯(lián)邦最高法院推翻了原判,其判決如下:(一)上訴人有資格主張結(jié)婚者的憲法權(quán)利。Tileston v.Ullman,318 U.S.44(1943)應(yīng)被區(qū)別對待,不適用于本案。(二)康涅狄格州關(guān)于禁止使用避孕手段的制定法侵犯了婚內(nèi)隱私權(quán),此權(quán)利處于權(quán)利法案所保護(hù)的特定權(quán)利范圍的灰色地帶,應(yīng)予保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:In this case, plaintiff, the executive director of the Connecticut Family Planning Commission and his medical director (a licensed physician), were both charged as accomplices in the state. The reasons are: they provide married women with knowledge and medical advice on contraception, as well as prescribing some women after testing and providing women with contraceptives and materials. This is because it is an offence to provide any contraceptive drug or device to anyone under Connecticut legislation. Both plaintiff complained that the enactment of the law applicable to the case violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, which was used to identify accomplices. However, after two state-level trials, the Connecticut Intermediate Court of Appeal found plaintiff guilty, and the State Supreme Court later upheld the verdict. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ruling as follows: (1) plaintiff was entitled to claim the constitutional rights of a married person. Tileston v. Ullman, 318 U.S.44 (1943) should be treated differently and not applicable in the present case. (2) Connecticut's legislation prohibiting the use of contraceptives violates the right to privacy within marriage, which is in a grey area within the specific scope of the rights protected by the Bill of Rights and shall be protected.
【作者單位】： 英國牛津大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類號】：D971.2
本文編號：2453726
[Abstract]:In this case, plaintiff, the executive director of the Connecticut Family Planning Commission and his medical director (a licensed physician), were both charged as accomplices in the state. The reasons are: they provide married women with knowledge and medical advice on contraception, as well as prescribing some women after testing and providing women with contraceptives and materials. This is because it is an offence to provide any contraceptive drug or device to anyone under Connecticut legislation. Both plaintiff complained that the enactment of the law applicable to the case violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, which was used to identify accomplices. However, after two state-level trials, the Connecticut Intermediate Court of Appeal found plaintiff guilty, and the State Supreme Court later upheld the verdict. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ruling as follows: (1) plaintiff was entitled to claim the constitutional rights of a married person. Tileston v. Ullman, 318 U.S.44 (1943) should be treated differently and not applicable in the present case. (2) Connecticut's legislation prohibiting the use of contraceptives violates the right to privacy within marriage, which is in a grey area within the specific scope of the rights protected by the Bill of Rights and shall be protected.
【作者單位】： 英國牛津大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類號】：D971.2
【相似文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條
1 未未;耶魯:從此不再寧靜 5·21美國校園爆炸案圖證[J];上海消防;2003年07期
2 ;[J];;年期
相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前3條
1 記者 賴競超 實習(xí)生 張思婉;肖志恒會見康涅狄格州州長[N];南方日報;2012年
2 記者 王建剛;巴裔嫌犯被警方逮捕[N];新華每日電訊;2010年
3 楊威;美國學(xué)校開始對可樂薯條說“不”[N];新華每日電訊;2005年
，本文編號：2453726
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2453726.html
