Letter: Beware the impact on privacy rights

Among all the media blabber about the possibility of the reversal of Roe V. Wade, there is one right that is under attack which is not mentioned. That is the right to privacy. Technically, there is no right to privacy in the Constitution; but, the Supreme Court for over a hundred years has taken the stance that the implications of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and 14th amendments indicate there is a broad establishment that citizens are entitled to privacy.

This runs counter to some conservative legal scholars, such as the Federalist Society (which is amusing as Federalism, by definition, proposes a strong Central Government overriding a state's policy contrary to the national interest). These scholars believe privacy is limited within the narrow scope of the aforementioned amendments and no further. A key justification for Roe was the right to privacy. In layman's terms, someone seeking an abortion is no one else's business.

Personally, I believe abortion is wrong. However, it is not my privilege to enforce with anyone else. If someone seeks one, that is between them and God. When I hear about the "rights of the unborn" I bring up the fact that the Constitution expressly states you have to be born (or naturalized) to have citizen status.

However, privacy is something that, if reduced, will have a vast ripple effect on how we conduct business and conduct our daily lives.

While there are those celebrating Roe's reversal, ask yourselves: "at what cost?" In the past two years, the Supreme Court has reversed a few other cases that minimized the resulted breach of privacy in the respective cases (Equifax, Juno Medical Services, etc). and gave deference to the state or a corporation. So the trend is there. The time to be concerned is now.

James Dixon

Lake in the Hills