<P> Justices Hugo Black and Potter Stewart wrote dissenting opinions . Justice Black argued that the right to privacy is nowhere to be found in the Constitution . Furthermore, he criticized the interpretations of the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments by his fellow justices . Justice Stewart called the Connecticut statute "an uncommonly silly law" but argued that it was nevertheless constitutional . </P> <P> The final decision of the court was later used in other cases related to sexual practices and other personal, often considered private, decisions for the American citizens . </P> <P> Later decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court extended the principles of Griswold beyond its particular facts . </P> <P> Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972) extended its holding to unmarried couples, whereas the "right of privacy" in Griswold was said to only apply to marital relationships . The argument in Eisenstadt was that it was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to deny unmarried couples the right to use contraception when married couples did have that right (under Griswold). Writing for the majority, Justice Brennan wrote that Massachusetts could not enforce the law against married couples because of Griswold v. Connecticut, so the law worked "irrational discrimination" if not extended to unmarried couples as well . </P>

In griswold v. connecticut the supreme court for the first time