Dksuddeth
Quote:
|
Unless you're looking at something different, my guess is that any constitutionally protected 'right' supercedes any state law that would infringe upon it.
|
I wasn't very clear that my interest is in the "privacy" rights that I mentioned. Some time back one of this forum's members insisted that there is no constitutional "right" to privacy. I was curious about that statement then, and now I'm not able to find the comment in a search. Let me use the most volatile of the "judicial activism" charges as an example. There is of course no constitutional "right" to abortion, and the states exercised their legislative right to address that issue as they saw fit. My question in this and the other "privacy" issues I listed, is what specific element of the constitution could be interpreted by SCOTUS as justification to supercede state law?