Right to Privacy the Bill of Rights

Right to Privacy

The Bill of Rights vs. The Constitution and the Right to Privacy in the United States

There are few documents in the world that are as unique and as important as the United States Constitution. This particular document is a fantastic compilation of laws that have survived decades, and centuries, with few additions. The U.S. Constitution, for this reason, is the supreme law of the land, and all must abide by it. However, the U.S. Constitution is not complete. That is, it is incomplete without amendments. The reason that the U.S. constitution is so strong and so all encompassing is because of the amendments to the constitution, which provide important rights, such as the right to free speech, the freedom of religion and the right to privacy. This paper will discuss how the right to privacy is regarded both by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and will give examples as to how this right functions in practical situations.

The right to privacy is defined, by the Law Dictionary, as the right to be left alone, in the absence of reasonable public interest. Thus, a person who is not a celebrity or a public figure should, by this definition be left alone; otherwise, according to the definition here, and, as one will see, the Bill of Rights, invasion of this right of privacy can be both the basis of a lawsuit and is thus, certainly, a violation of the law.

According to both history of law and various studies, as well as Supreme Court decisions and their subsequent implementations, there are no specific provisions in the Constitution that truly ensure the above-stated. Thus, there is nothing specific in the Constitution that would protect an individual against the invasion of his or her right to privacy. For this reason, the Supreme Court has seen it necessary to amend the Constitution, and to give individuals the certainty necessary that the rights to privacy will not be violated, and has done this through amendments 1 (privacy of beliefs), 3 (privacy of the home against invasion of U.S. soldiers, etc.), 4 (privacy against unreasonable searches) and 5 (privilege against self-incrimination), among others.

There are many instances that one can provide in which the right of privacy has been explored. One of these is in the case of abortion, in Roe vs. Wade (1972), and another is the more recent debate on the right of privacy in the United States in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. In the first instance, the Burger Court insisted on an extension of the right to privacy in the sense that it included a woman's right to have an abortion.

The abortion case is very important because it provides the U.S. with the vital issue that is now hotly debated, but that promotes yet another freedom, the freedom of choice.

Another issue that relates to the right of privacy is the debate spurned on by the terrorist attacks on the United States and the subsequent tapping of many phones and other communication devices. The reason wire-tapping legislation that was enacted in the aftermath of the attacks has become so controversial is because it in fringes upon a person's liberty to speak freely and to whomever he or she wants. In other words, wiretapping makes all individuals suspects, or at least zeroes in on those suspected, infringing upon their liberties and their right to privacy no matter if they have or have not been convicted. In these cases only a little suspicion is necessary.

The similarities between these two different time periods and these two different privacy-related issues are in the fact that they both deal with two crucial liberties, the freedom of choice and the freedom of speech, and how these relate to privacy issues. The differences, however, come from the fact that the first issue deals with simply a woman-related issue, while the second affects all individuals, and zeros in specifically on those of a certain ethnicity, most of the times. Thus, while the first privacy-related case and the second deal with infringement upon vital freedoms, it is in the second that most individuals are affected and it is the second that discriminates and infringes upon a person's liberties, while the first aims simply to protect a person and enable him or her to make the right decision. Thus, while the first aims to protect, the second, while aiming to protect the population at large, also discriminates and infringes upon the right of privacy, in a way, as described above.

Both of these instances are significant, however, due to the impact they have both had upon American lives. Furthermore, both events were caused by substantial shifts in U.S. mentality. First, abortion became a vital issue as women got more and more rights and as the women's movement grew, and in the second case, there was a huge societal shift as the terrorist struck the U.S. And everybody was in a panic. Both instances, with their similarities and differences, have had consequences. While the issue of abortion and freedom of choice is still vital in today's society and while many still argue about it, it is an important issue for the simple fact that it has a great deal to do with how society functions. In the second case, this is true as well, as the laws enacted with regards to wiretapping still affect us, years after September 11.