The Ninth and Tenth Amendments prove that just because a right is not enumerated does not mean it does not exist. This is supported by the meaning of the Fourth, being secure in our persons and papers.
It is ironic that one of the points of legal theory upon which Roe v Wade was decided was the implied right to privacy. The other point being that an unborn child was not a “person” for purposes of enjoying protection of the Constitution.
A Court that can invent a new right out of thin air can equally render an enumerated right so that it is nullified.
We have reached such a shameful and dangerous state of the judiciary with respect to both the plain text and the plain meaning of the Constitution. And our public officials will expand their power to infinity until a superior power stops them.
I would propose a reset, but the sad truth is that even if we were to go back to some ideal moment in the life of the Constitution, events starting with FDR would be a roadmap for bringing the country exactly to this point again.
Speaking of FDR, there is that Wickard case to talk about too. Wickard v. Filburn :: 317 U.S. 111 (1942) Where a farmer growing his own grain to feed to his own hogs was subject to federal regulation because when he didn’t sell his grain or hog on the interstate market that could affect the price of grain or hogs and thus have a federal nexus.
Go figure.
“Privacy”, at least the modern legal understanding of it, goes back to Griswold v. Connecticut. At the time(1965?) Connecticut forbid the sending of birth control information through the mail. The Supreme Court found that Connecticut mail receivers had a reasonable expectation that the state would not be opening their mail.
As I recall(a bit hazily), GvC was one of the building block for Roe v. Wade.