Nevertheless, in an article for Live Science, Tim Sharp pointed out that "The right to privacy often means the right to personal autonomy, or the right to choose whether or not to engage in certain acts or have certain experiences." In this connection, he went on to point out that "Several amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been used in varying degrees of success in determining a right to personal autonomy:
The First Amendment protects the privacy of beliefs
The Third Amendment protects the privacy of the home against the use of it for housing soldiers
The Fourth Amendment protects privacy against unreasonable searches
The Fifth Amendment protects against self-incrimination, which in turn protects the privacy of personal information
The Ninth Amendment says that the "enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." This has been interpreted as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.
The right to privacy is most often cited in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment"
Sharp also pointed out in his article that a right to privacy has been explicitly protected by various statutory laws (like the Privacy Act of 1974, the Financial Monetization Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, HIPAA). Moreover, in addition to Roe, Sharp mentioned a number of other decisions by the Supreme Court which have established this right (like Griswold vs Connecticut, Stanley vs Georgia, and Lawrence vs Texas).
Now the principal argument that Republicans have employed against almost all of the Supreme Court's decisions in terms of a right to privacy has been their tendency to "undermine traditional values." In other words, they don't like any decisions which would undermine the morality which they would like to impose on society. Never mind that imposing one group's moral values on the whole of society could be said to establish a state religion (which is clearly unconstitutional). For many of these folks, the state has a compelling interest in the perpetuation of these values (the standard which the courts have used to limit the right to privacy).
Along comes Covid-19, however, and all of that stuff is thrown out of the window! Years and years of arguing against what Justice Louis Brandeis characterized as "the right to be left alone" has suddenly become sacrosanct to Republicans. It is amazing just how many of these folks have developed an attachment to this concept almost overnight! When it comes to public health requirements relative to Covid-19 (like wearing masks, social distancing and vaccination mandates), Republicans have finally embraced the fact that they have a right to be left alone - to make their own decisions. And, they've also suddenly decided that other folks' right to life should NOT stand in the way of their right to be left alone and make their own decisions. As usual, however, most of these folks see absolutely no contradiction in their new position.
