The last entry notwithstanding, one of these days I'm going to get a Kindle device, since there are so many online documents to download. I like easy access away from the computer, but the Kindle will provide that. Many of these are provided on .pdf formats that can be so downloaded. For instance, Justice Blackmun once noted:
The fact that individuals define themselves in a significant way through their intimate sexual relationships with others suggests, in a Nation as diverse as ours, that there may be many "right" ways of conducting those relationships, and that much of the richness of a relationship will come from the freedom an individual has to choose the form and nature of these intensely personal bonds. See Karst, The Freedom of Intimate Association, 89 Yale L.J. 624, 637 (1980)[.]
I was able to access said article, a quite interesting one that basically connects intimate association [readily recognized (see Section II) a few years later] as connected to three basic rights: First Amendment (self-expression, association and some shades of religious freedom), equality and substantive due process. Denial of benefits is discussed as a major way such a right is wrongly denied. Also, the article notes that current understandings of morality might in some way (realistically if not totally consistently; in theory, it holds some forms of adult incest as protected; not going to happen in real life ... ditto less extreme examples) affect judicial holdings. So, it looks to the future but also has a realistic aspect that is always appreciated.
Anyways, I was able to download the article in .pdf form but if I wanted ready access away from my computer or in my hands (I find this convenient, including to mark the copy up), a printed version is necessary. But, printing out 70 pages is likely to use up my printer ink pretty fast. So, I'm tempted (as I did for a longer works) to have it printed out at Staples or something. This is fairly cheap (under $10 for this article), but it's not something I want to do each time. Kindle would allow me to download it for free and perhaps there is a notes function too.
But, I'm not there yet -- it does cost something like $200, right? Anyways, recently covered a Roe related lower court case where the connection between feminism and the right to obtain an abortion was closely joined. It turns out Roe itself is a similar case, which is why the whole context should be provided:
We wanted to distribute the provider information to the newspapers, but we were worried that we might be charged as accomplices in abortions — which was an actual threat back then — if we spread the word. When I went to the library, to see exactly where the laws stood, I started finding cases challenging the anti-abortion statutes in various states, including the Griswold case. And we decided we would file a lawsuit challenging the Texas statutes. Lots of people ask me why the case fell to me. It's because this group decided we wanted a woman to take it, and we also wanted someone who'd do it for free.
Women were active providing abortion information for those who need it and as part of that effort used the law to protect their interests. Again, to restate a theme, we are not just talking about a broad "liberty" here or even a "right to privacy," but tend to have an interrelated set of interests like those touched upon in the Karst article. For instance, homosexuals associate or express themselves in a certain way, but are singled out, based on selective morality with strong religious overtones in a burdensome way. Inequality alert. As usual, the context of the case is not only pretty interesting, but necessary to get a full sense of the right result.
Anyways, pretty good article (though why not include an appendix listing the "fifty or so" post-Griswold cases referenced?). Oh, and Dawn Johnsen ... love that voice!