[Cboldt]

chipping away at the notion of penumbras and emanations doesn't necessarily mean overruling Griswold. It can mean emphatically thrashing any opinion which attempts to use that judicial creation to justify any particular holding of the court.

There must be a law review or something that analyzes the reult if Griswold is upheld by White's logic (substantive due process), and all the emanations and penumbras crap is tossed out. What other cases fall, losing the rationale expressed in the majority opinions other than White's?

And what other cans of worms are opened if substantive due process is elevated?

[Kryptonite]

Wish I could help you on those questions but I don't have the answers off the top of my head. I don't think that chipping away in future cases necessarily means past cases must be overruled even if their logical underpinnings are attacked.

If you come across something like that sort of law review on the penumbras and/or due process questions I'd be interested as well.