View this case and other resources at:
Citation. 381 U.S. 479, 85 S. Ct. 1678, 14 L. Ed. 2d 510, 1965 U.S. 2282.
Brief Fact Summary. A Connecticut statute prohibited the use of contraceptives both by married and unmarried persons. The statute also prohibited anyone from helping couples obtain contraceptives. Griswold provided information as to the means of preventing conception and was fined as an accessory under the statute.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. A law which seeks to achieve its goals by means having a destructive impact on a relationship lying within the zone of privacy may not be achieved by means that sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade that area of freedom.
A Connecticut statute prohibited the use of any drugs or other instruments designed to prevent conception. Appellants, Griswold and Buxton, gave medical advice to married persons on how to prevent conception and thereupon were convicted under the statute. Subsequently, Appellants challenged the constitutionality of the statute. The purpose of the statute was to discourage all forms of promiscuous or illicit sexual relationships. Issue.
Was the Connecticut statute constitutional?