This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Uncategorized

Constitutional law to Privacy

Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.

Any subject. Any type of essay. We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.

GET YOUR PRICE

writers online

Constitutional law to Privacy

 

Student name:

Institutional affiliation:

Date of submission:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Washington law to make bestiality a Class C felony punishable by five years in prison seems to violate the constitutional right to privacy. First, the constitution defines the Right to Privacy as “freedom from intrusion into personal lives, particularly at home” (Kugler & Strahilevitz, 2016). The constitution has to take bestiality as intimate sexual conduct that should be practiced in Privacy. In the context of Privacy, privacy matters in bestiality, particularly through surveillance and monitoring when it occurs at one’s home (P.237). As such, the constitution requires that it is unconstitutional for a person involved in bestiality to be monitored under any circumstances.

Additionally, based on the case between Griswold v. Connecticut, the Washington law on bestiality is also seen to contradict constitutional rights to Privacy. The constitution protects the right to marital Privacy against restrictions imposed by states (McCarthy, 2017). Thus, making bestiality a law by Washington is seen as a restriction imposed by a state on marital Privacy, which then violates the constitutional right to Privacy. For instance, in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, the decision by the Supreme Court was that thought the does not protect a general right to Privacy, the various guarantees within the bill of rights at least create some “zones” that establish a Right to Privacy.  One of the most common such ones is when an act of marital relationship occurs at home. In this context, the constitution guarantees such acts right to Privacy. Based on this law, thus, the Washington law is violating the constitutional right to Privacy.

 

 

 

References

McCarthy, E. (2017). In Defense of Griswold v. Connecticut: Privacy, Originalism, and the Iceberg Theory of Omission. Willamette L. Rev.54, 335.

Kugler, M. B., & Strahilevitz, L. J. (2016). Actual Expectations of Privacy, Fourth Amendment Doctrine, and the Mosaic Theory. The Supreme Court Review2015(1), 205-263.

 

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask