Explain the right to privacy as it relates to perceived socially harmful conduct
What will be an ideal response?
The precise contours of the right to privacy have not been fully outlined by the courts. At one time, the right was perceived as a limitation on the authority of a legislature to prohibit socially harmful conduct. Recent court decisions, however, have indicated that this right has limited viability.9 In Stanley v. Georgia, the Court discussed the right of Americans "to be free, except in very limited circumstances, from unwanted governmental intrusions into one's privacy." The Stanley case indicated that we have a right to possess obscene material in our homes without fear of governmental intrusion. If it is not illegal to possess obscene material, is it permissible to possess illegal drugs in the privacy of our homes? As of this date, no court has held that we have such a right. The Stanley case may be limited only to obscene material.
You might also like to view...
Like Kant, Rawls favors establishing ______ or principles to govern our sense of justice.
What will be an ideal response?
Courts were not in place until the Constitution was ratified
a. True b. False
With regard to violence in the prison, over time, most inexperienced prison guards:
a. Are more likely to report excessive violence by other guards. b. Get used to the violence and accept it. c. Became more active in trying to protect inmates from violence by other guards. d. Became more active in trying to protect inmates from other inmates.
The State of Michigan v. Christopher Jones provides an instance of:
a. the importance of selecting open-minded jurors b. the difficulties of proving guilt in a rape case c. a prosecutor's use of multiple charges to pressure defendants to plead guilty d. the unreliable nature of eyewitness testimony e. a suspect's waiving of Miranda rights