norml21 - Page 44



Page 44 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 A number of courts, state and federal, have advanced the
 asserted rights of the student on Ninth Amendment grounds, either
 as a fundamental right of privacy_ Arn___Dl_ Vo Car_p_gnter_ 459 F2d
 939 (7th Ciro 1972); Breen v Kahlf 419 Fo2d 1034 (7th Ciro
 1969); Cossen v_ Fatsi_ 309 Fo Suppo 114 (D_Co Conn. 1970);
 Reiche__berg vo Nelso!l, 310 F_ Supp. 248 (DoC_ Nebo 1970); Dunham
 v. Pulsifg_r, 312 Fo Supp. 411 (D.C. Vt. 1970); Black v. Cothre______2!,
 316 F. Supp. 468 (DoC. Nebo 1970); Ber_ryman vo Hei__!!, 329 F. Supp.
 616 (D.C. Idaho 1971), the liberty to gow_rn one's personal
 appearance, Bisho_ Vo Col_i_, 450 F.2d 1069 (Sth Cir. 1971), or,
 as expressed by Justice Douglas, the right of personal taste,
 _ 9 _)
 __rjghy v. Pocatello School Dist!ict No. _.], 480 Po2d 878 (Idaho
 1971) o
 In In thematt___er of JoS_&_C__, 129 N.Yo Super. 486r 324 A.2d
 90 (1974), the court held the right of a homosexual parent to the
 companionship and care of his or her children to be a fundamental
 right protected by the First_ Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments.
 In that case, the Court concluded that the fact that one divorced
 parent is a homosexual does not per se prcvide sufficient basis
 for a deprivation of visitation rights. 324 A.2d at 94.
 Numerous other state court cases have recognized the Ninth
 Amendment as providing substantive protection for individual
 rights, Lehrha___Zk_ v Fl_yn_!, 357 Ao2d 35_ 140 N_j. Super. 250
 (1976) (privacy); State Vo O_gillf 545 Po2d 97 (Or.
 44




Previous , Next , Return to Index