Court Precedents
In reply to Raoul Berger (Commentary, Aug. 27), who wants to know why precedents established by the Warren Court should be more sacrosanct than those the court overturned, for example, Roe vs. Wade, I find the following reason compelling: The Warren Court’s precedents assert the rights of the individual against the power of the government.
Berger argues that the “right of privacy” asserted by Justice William Douglas is not mentioned in the Constitution. I would remind him that Amendment IX in the Bill of Rights states: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” And since he quotes Justice Louis Brandeis on overturning precedents, he might remember Brandeis on “the right of people to be let alone.”
I find it strange that while conservatives are applauding the Soviet people’s demands for freedom from government oppression they are happy to have our present Supreme Court enlarge police powers and the power of our own government to meddle in our own private lives.
HERB LIVINGSTON, Los Angeles
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
