Sandra Day O'Connor,
Michael H. v. Gerald D. — Concurring Opinion
(1989)
“ This footnote sketches a mode of historical analysis to be used when identifying liberty interests protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment that may be somewhat inconsistent with our past decisions in this area. See Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1678, 14 L.Ed.2d 510 (1965) ; Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 92 S.Ct. 1029, 31 L.Ed.2d 349 (1972) . On occasion the Court has characterized relevant traditions protecting asserted rights at levels of generality that might not be "the most specific level" available. ”
