What idea was the decision in griswold v. connecticut based upon?

a. if the constitution forbids self-incrimination, husbands and wives should not be forced to testify against each other.
b. the constitution cannot possibly include all rights, so judges can create new ones based on what the founders must have been thinking.
c. if the constitution forbids unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy.
d. the constitution does not meet everyone's needs, so citizens can disregard laws when they think the government is violating their rights.

Option C.

Explanation:

If the constitution forbids unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy, is the right answer.

Griswold v. Connecticut was a milestone lawsuit in the history of the United States concerning the access to contraception. This  case  included a Connecticut "Comstock law" which outlawed anyone from using "any drug, therapeutic item or instrument to impede conception."  

The court ruled that the ordinance was unconstitutional by giving evidence that the law infringed the "right to matrimonial privacy",  placing the foundation for the right to privacy concerning intimate manners. Accordingly, in this case, the decision was based upon if the constitution prohibits unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy

yes they have. but is this a true false question? if it is, the answer is true.

bfnfnfnfnfj d dnfnfnfnfnfndn