Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.
California Supreme Court
1DissentMosk, J.
I dissent.
Article I, section 1 of the California Constitution declares a right of privacy. Its pronouncement is express. Nothing is left to implication. “All people” have an “inalienable right[]” to “pursu[e] and obtain[]” “privacy.”
Before proceeding a sentence further, we must make one point pellucidly clear.
This is not a case about the “policy” this court may think it best to formulate and implement with regard to privacy.
Rather, it is a case about the California Constitution and the role of the judiciary within the order it establishes.
The majority all but abrogate the right of privacy.…
2Cases cited62 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. MatlockSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.