By Katelyn Yang, VI Form

The Shen Speech Prize: The Enduring Constitutional Shield of the Warren Court

Editor’s Note: The Shen Prize is awarded to the winner of a public speaking contest among Advanced Placement United States History students on the topic of democracy. The prize is given by Y.L. Shen in honor of his daughters, Ing-ie (Ava) Shen of the Class of 1988 and Ing-Chuan (Judy) Shen of the Class of 1989.

Inscribed on the headstone of former Chief Justice Earl Warren are some of these words that bear a powerful message even today: “Where there is injustice, we should correct it; Where there is neglect, we should provide care; And wherever corrections are achieved, we should add them permanently to our storehouse of treasures.” 

We enjoy many rights and freedoms from the Warren Court’s ‘storehouse of treasures.’ This U.S. Supreme Court served from 1953 to 1969 and arguably did more to advance individual rights and liberties than any court before or after. Such rights and liberties are vital to a functioning democracy as they allow citizens to participate fully and effectively. However, they were not always respected by governing majorities. 

The Warren Court sought to create a ‘constitutional shield’ against the tyranny of the majority. By striking down discriminatory laws, the Court expanded democracy by extending the Bill of Rights protections to more Americans. By recognizing privacy and voting rights, the Court broadened individual liberties. Moreover, the Court’s accomplishments remind us that when American institutions act with empathy and courage, they can bring the nation closer to a true democracy. 

Nearly all American lives have been impacted by a Warren Court decision. Consider Brown vs. Board of Education, which abolished racial segregation; Reynolds vs. Sims, which guaranteed “one person, one vote;” Miranda vs. Arizona, which limited abuse of police power; and Griswold vs. Connecticut, which legalized birth control. These and other landmark Warren Court decisions greatly expanded democracy and added meaning to the nation’s highest ideals of equality, liberty, and justice. 

Griswold was the first Supreme Court decision to recognize the right to privacy. This case challenged Connecticut’s birth control law, which turned women who wanted contraceptives and their doctors into criminals. Low-income and minority women bore the brunt of this law. 

The Court struck down the state’s right to ban contraception for married couples, asserting that “penumbras” in specific Bill of Rights guarantees create “zones of privacy.” In asking, “Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives?” the Court raised the issue of government authority declaring it could not intrude upon marital relations, thereby establishing the right to “marital privacy.” 

Access to birth control transformed women’s health and societal roles; their increased economic and social opportunities expanded democracy. Legally, Griswold paved the way for broader marital and reproductive freedoms, including the right to interracial marriage, the right to abortion, and the right to same-sex marriage. 

Legal scholar John Hart Ely, however, offered a contrasting perspective on the Court’s approach to constitutional interpretation. While recognizing the significance of its decisions, Ely criticized its judicial activism and argued that the Court overstepped its boundaries.

Griswold and all of the Warren Court decisions protected our most fundamental but most vulnerable rights and freedoms. It is uncertain if another Court will have the same vision and commitment to democracy; however, the world would undoubtedly be far more cruel and unjust without the Warren Court’s ‘storehouse of treasures.’

Katelyn Yang is a boarding student from Singapore and a member of the St. Mark’s class of 2024. Kate also hopes to pursue her passions, from leading the tennis varsity team to exploring the worlds of STEM, arts, and design and working with at-risk children.