The federal constitution does not "grant rights" to the people. It limits what the government can do to the people.
The inclusion of the bill of rights was meant to specifically stop the government from forgetting their place in certain specific cases that were known to be troublesome. But the 9th amendment makes it clear that these are not our only rights.
Again, forgetting for the moment the power of states -- What part of the federal constitution would be used to determine that the federal government had the power to restrict the use of a contraceptive (assuming also for the sake of discussion that the contraceptive is preventative)?
I'm a bit of a libertarian so my answer is that it isn't there. But I believe the government has no constitutional right to keep me from growing the plant cannibis in my back yard, even if they have the right to keep me from selling it or smoking it.
It would be hard to see how you would extend the commerce clause to the use of a condom.
I bet Griswald has wording in the opinion that is dead wrong, even if I agree with its conclusion. I know Griswald is used to expand rights to places where the government clearly has the power and the obligation to regulate -- but just because a ruling is used to make bad law doesn't mean the ruling itself was incorrect.
I can't imagine any justice making it through confirmation if they did not say the agreed with the result of Griswald.
Since there will not be a transcript of the conversation, we have to accept that Specter is going to put his spin on her answer, just as Schumer did, in order to strengthen their positions.
Roberts pledged fealty to the outcome of Griswald, while strictly limiting the area of applicability he would accept without question. I presume that in the hearing, Miers will be asked the same question, and will likely provide the same answer (she's probably memorising it as we speak).
Again, forgetting for the moment the power of states -- What part of the federal constitution would be used to determine that the federal government had the power to restrict the use of a contraceptive (assuming also for the sake of discussion that the contraceptive is preventative)?I don’t think you are clear on what I said in my post, to which you are responding. I have not contended that the US Constitution gives the federal government the power to restrict the use of a contraceptive.
patent