# data[].attributes.headline
In the Griswold v Connecticut case (1965), The supreme court ruled (7 to 2) that the state's ban on the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy, overturning the outdated "Comstock" laws (1879) which prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception." As well as punishing those who assists or counsels those seeking Birth control. Estelle Griswold and Lee Buxton (executive director of  the PPLC and a Yale doctor) were arrested because they provided the "illegal contraception". A quote from the ruling; “Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive…”-William O. Douglas

# data[].attributes.subject
In the Griswold v Connecticut case (1965), The supreme court ruled (7 to 2) that the state's ban on the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy, overturning the outdated "Comstock" laws (1879) which prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception." As well as punishing those who assists or counsels those seeking Birth control. Estelle Griswold and Lee Buxton (executive director of  the PPLC and a Yale doctor) were arrested because they provided the "illegal contraception". A quote from the ruling; “Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive…”-William O. Douglas

# data[].attributes.body
Cooper, Joseph H. “CT's Argument Against Birth Control: It Begets Adultery.” Courant.com, Hartford Courant, 12 Dec. 2018, www.courant.com/opinion/op-ed/hc-op-cooper-griswold-v-connecticut-birth-control-0607-20150605-story.html.

Brass, Lori Ann. “An Arrest in New Haven, Contraception and the Right to Privacy.” Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, 15 Apr. 2007, medicine.yale.edu/news/yale-medicine-magazine/an-arrest-in-new-haven-contraception-and-the/.

“Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972).” Justia Law, supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/405/438/.

“Griswold v. Connecticut.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 11 Oct. 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut.

Parenthood, Planned. “Griswold v. Connecticut.” Planned Parenthood Action Fund, www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/birth-control/griswold-v-connecticut.

“Population Services Intern. v. Carey, 476 F. Supp. 4 (S.D.N.Y. 1979).” Justia Law, law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/476/4/1378672/.

“Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).” Justia Law, supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/.

“Today in Connecticut History: The 53rd Anniversary of Griswold vs. Connecticut.” NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut, 7 June 2018, www.prochoicect.org/2018/06/07/today-connecticut-history-53rd-anniversary-griswold-vs-connecticut/.

Kreager, Derek A, and Jeremy Staff. “THE SEXUAL DOUBLE STANDARD AND ADOLESCENT PEER ACCEPTANCE.” Social Psychology Quarterly, U.S. National Library of Medicine, June 2009, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4256532/.

# data[].attributes.body
Case is cited in
Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)-Right to birth control for unmarried couples

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)-Right to an abortion for any woman

Population Services Intern. v. Carey, 476 F. Supp. 4 (1977)- Right to birth control for juveniles over the age of 16

# data[].attributes.body
One of the judges who opposed the nullification stated basically said that easy access to birth control is immoral because it could possibly lead to adultery and that it's not necessary considering if you time intercourse correctly, you don't need it. This argument implies that women are inherently disloyal, seeking sexual gratification are immoral. We see this still today in terms of a double standard between men and women. Stated by the NCBI, “According to the sexual double standard, boys and men are rewarded and praised for heterosexual sexual contacts, whereas girls and women are derogated and stigmatized for similar behaviors.”

# data[].attributes.body
There were many protests that would take place outside of these birth control clinics. People try to shame those going in and receiving treatment or try to guilt/scare them out of it. Birth control was seen as a huge taboo. One argument was that it went against "gods plan". This act of protesting women's right to control over their bodies mirrors today how people will protest outside of abortion clinics. And similar how now, people want to overturn Roe V Wade, there were actually 3 cases in total (1941) (1961)(1965) that had the same goal of Griswold V Connecticut. Both are very long fights. Both are arguments discussing morality.

# data[].attributes.body
Estelle Griswold celebrating the success of the case

# data[].attributes.body
This case was cited in 3 cases further allowing women to have control over their futures and allowing them to plan their families when they're ready. Led to them being able to have a choice. It began an era of change for sexual and reproductive rights in the U.S.

At the time of case-32/100,000 died during birth-today, it is less than half of that

Infant mortality rate- went from 25/1000 to 6/1000

Women now allowed to invest in their futures and careers; given time to plan their families

From 1960 to 2011, the percentage of women who completed four or more years of college multiplied by six

number of married women in the labor force nearly doubled between 1960 and 2012

58% of all women who use the pill rely on it, at least in part, for something other than pregnancy prevention, including endometriosis, cramps, or even acne.

# data[].attributes.body
(I accidentally showed the loom menu oops)