Grusendorf v Oklahoma City, 816 F. 2d 539 (U.S. Court of Appeals for Essay

Grusendorf v Oklahoma City, 816 F. 2d 539 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 1987) - Essay frameworkThe Supreme Court observed that only personal rights that can be deemed important in the concept of ordered liberty are included in this guarantee of personal liberty( Ducat, 2009).The Court outlined the current reach of these freedoms as embracing personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing and education. The defendant argues out that the law employ to judge him was not applicable and did not match with his case (The federal reporter, 1987).To resolve the issue of whether or not Grusendorfs rights of liberty or silence were violated by the non-smoking regulation, it is instructive to study the Supreme Courts approach in Kelley v. Johnson. The case is similar as this one though the plaintiff there was a police officer rather than a firefighter and claimed a fourteenth amendment right to grow a beard rather than a right to consume a cigarette (Bureau of National Affairs , 1995).A review of the record suggests that the district court found the defendants disputes influential. The defendants moved for an award of attorneys fees and submitted briefs in nourishment of it, together with affidavits from their attorneys detailing their fees. Bowers v. Hardwick said that the federal courts should not take an expansive view of their authority to discover new fundamental