Robert Bork's The Right of Privacy examined the landmark case Griswald v. Conneticut. Bork's 'originalist' view proclaimed that Justice Douglas erroneously interpreted the right of privacy from the Constitution. The originalist view is that judges must strictly adhere to the language of the Constitution, thus people do not have a general right to privacy because it was never actually written into the Constitution. This view severely restricts judges in dealing with new issues that our
showed first 75 words of 872 total
showed last 75 words of 872 total
consisting of the most learned and able legal experts in the country) should have the ability to interpret certain aspects of the Constitution in order to prevent the Constitution from becoming a dated, historical document. Problems will continue to rise that the fathers of this country could not have possibly envisioned. Robert Bork's 'originalist' view is far too restrictive in practice to allow the Constitution to be as vital today as it was 200 years ago.