Griswold appealed her conviction, arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses prohibited the anti-contraceptive legislation. The Supreme Court agreed. While the Court acknowledged that the Constitution never explicitly mentions privacy, it argued that it was clear, from looking at provisions of the Constitution, which it was meant to protect privacy. The concurring opinions, while not expressing the majority of the Court, argued that the Ninth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment provided support for a right to privacy (See generally, 381 U.S. 479). The Griswold decision was specifically limited to its facts, and applied to the use of contraceptives between married people. However, relatively quickly the Court expanded that holding. In Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972), the Court was called upon to determine whether it was legal to deny unmarried couples the right to use contraceptives, when married couples had that right. The Court, building upon the already established right-to-privacy, determined that it would be discriminatory to deny unmarried persons the same right.

While the anti-contraceptive laws were rarely enforced, the holding that contraception was a matter of privacy, and that privacy was a protected constitutional right, helped pave the way for what is probably the single-most controversial Supreme Court decision in modern history. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is not the most important Supreme Court decision. Earlier Supreme Court decisions had denied a free black man's claim for

Therefore, activist Courts had long been construing laws in ways beyond the specific provisions of the Constitution. However, there is little doubt that Roe is one of the most controversial decisions, and it has actually remained a political talking point for almost 40 years after its passage. Roe is a complicated decision. It attempts to balance the state's interest in preserving protecting human life with a woman's right to privacy, and, in doing so, sets up a legal standard based on medical standards, which has made the case vulnerable to revision. However, as far as privacy laws are considered, Roe set the standard that a woman's choice to have an abortion during early pregnancy is part of her right to privacy (See generally, 410 U.S. 113).
Finally, in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), the Court expanded the idea of privacy beyond heterosexual relationships. Previously, the Court had determined that a state could have a legitimate interest in prohibiting homosexual contact. However, the Court determined that Texas' anti-sodomy statute, because it targeted intimate sexual contact and attempted to control personal relationships, violated the right to liberty. Basically, the Court held that adults are able to engage in private, consensual, sexual-behavior without the government interfering.