El derecho a la privacidad en los Estados Unidosaproximación diacrónica a los intereses constitucionales en juego

  1. Saldaña Díaz, María Nieves
Teoría y realidad constitucional

ISSN: 1139-5583

Year of publication: 2011

Issue: 28

Pages: 279-312

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/TRC.28.2011.6960 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Teoría y realidad constitucional

Bibliographic References

  • FLAHERTY, D. H., Privacy in Colonial New England, Univer- sity Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1972; O’CONNOR, TH. H., «The Right to Privacy in Historical Perspective», Massachusetts Law Review, vol. 53, 1968,
  • WARREN, S. y BRANDEIS, L. D., El derecho a la intimidad, Editorial Civitas, Madrid, 1995,
  • BRATMAN, B. E., «Brandeis and Warren’s The Right to Privacy and The Birth of The Right to Privacy», Tennessee Law Review, vol. 69, 2002
  • BARRON, J. H., «Warren and Brandeis, ‘The Right to Privacy’, 4 Harvard Law Review, 193 (1890):
  • BARRON, J. H., Demystifying a Landmark Citation», Suffolk University Law Review, vol. 13, 1979
  • GLANCY, D. J., «The Invention of the Right to Privacy», Arizona Law Review, vol. 21, núm. 1, 1979, págs. 1-39.
  • GORMLEY, K., «One Hundred Years of Privacy», Wisconsin Law Review, 1992
  • WHITMAN, J. Q., «The Two Western Culture of Privacy: Dignity versus Liberty», Yale Law Journal, vol. 113, 2004, págs. 1151-1221.
  • SOLOVE, D. J., «Conceptualizing privacy», California Law Review, vol. 90, 2002, págs. 1087-1155;
  • POST, R. C., «Three Concepts of Privacy», Georgetown Law Journal, vol. 89, 2001, págs. 2087-2098;
  • BENZANSON, R. P., «The Right to Privacy Revisited: Privacy, News, and Social Change, 1890-1990», California Law Review, vol. 80, 1992, págs. 1133-1175;
  • RUBENFELD, J., «The Right of Pri- vacy», Harvard Law Review, vol. 102, 1989, págs. 737-807;
  • GAVISON, R., «Privacy and the Limits of Law», The Yale Law Journal, vol. 89, 1980
  • GERETY, T., «Redefining Privacy», Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberty Law Review, vol. 12, 1977,
  • CRAVEN, B., «Personhood: The Right to Be Let Alone», Duke Law Journal, vol. 15, 1976, págs. 699-720;
  • BLOUSTEIN, E., «Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity: an Answer to Dean Prosser», New York University Law Review, vol. 39, 1964, págs. 962-1007.
  • COOLEY, TH. M., A Treatise on the Law of Torts or the Wrongs Which Arise Independently of Contract, Callaghan, Chicago, 1879
  • COOLEY, TH. M., A Treatise on the Constitutional Limitations which Rest upon the Legislative Power of the States of the American Union, Little, Brown, and Co., Boston, 1868
  • PITT, W., «Speech on the Excise Bill», vid. The Parliamentary History of England from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, 23 vols., T. C. HANSARD (ed.), London, 1806-1820, vol. 15 (1753-1765),
  • LASSON, N. B., The History and Development of the Fourth Amendment to the United States, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1937;
  • LANDYNSKI, J. B., Search and Seizure and the Supreme Court: Study in Constitutional Interpretation, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1966;
  • DAVIES, Th. Y., «Recovering the Original Fourth Amendment», Michigan Law Review, núm. 98, 1999, págs. 547-750;
  • CLANCY, Th. K., The Fourth Amendment: Its History and Interpretation, Carolina Academic Press, Durham, 2008.
  • COOLEY, Th. M., A Treatise on the Law of Torts or the Wrongs Which Arise Independently of Contract, Callaghan, Chicago, 1879,
  • CLANCY, Th. K., «What Does the Fourth Amendment Protect: Property, Privacy, or Security?», Wake Forest Law Review, vol. 33, 1998, págs. 307-370,
  • CLOUD, M., «The Fourth Amendment During the Lochner Era: Privacy, Property and Liberty in Constitutional Theory», Stanford Law Review, vol. 48, 1996, págs. 555-631;
  • BARRET, E. L., «Personal Rights, Property Rights, and the Fourth Amendment», Supreme Court Review, 1960
  • REDLICH, N., «Are there ‘certain rights retained by the people’», New York University Law Review, vol. 37, 1962.
  • WATSON, G., «The Ninth Amendment: Source of a Substantive Right to Privacy», John Marshall Law Review, vol. 19, 1985-1986, págs. 959-981.
  • JOHNSON, J. W., Griswold v. Connecticut: Birth Control and the Constitutional Right of Privacy, University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, 2005;
  • TUSHNET, M., «Two Notes on the Jurisprudence of Privacy», Constitutional Commentary, vol. 8, 1991.
  • GREELY, H., «A Footnote to ‘Penumbra’ in Griswold v. Connecticut», Constitutional Commentary, vol. 6, 1989
  • HENKIN, L., «Privacy and Autonomy», Columbia Law Review, vol. 74, 1974, págs. 1410-1433,
  • DIXON, R. G., The Right of Privacy: A Symposium on the Implications of Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 497 (1965), New York, Da Capo Press, 1971.
  • GERETY, T., «Doing Without Privacy», Ohio State Law Journal, vol. 42, 1981
  • WELLINGTON, H., «Common Law Rules and Constitutional Double Standards», Yale Law Journal, vol. 83, 1973,
  • TRIBE, L. H., Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes, Norton, New York, 1990
  • FRIENLY, F. y MART- HA, J. H., The Constitution: That Delicate Balance, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993
  • LINZER, P., «The Carolene Products Footnote and the Preferred Position of Individual Rights: Louis Lusky and John Hart Ely vs. Harlan Fiske Stone», Constitutional Commentary, vol. 12, 1995;
  • BENNET, R., «Objectivity in Constitutional Law», University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 132, 1984
  • FALLON, R., «A Constructivist Coherence Theory of Constitutional Interpretation», Harvard Law Review, vol. 100, 1987, págs. 1211-1217;
  • GREY, T., «The Constitution as Scripture», Stanford Law Review, vol. 37, 1984
  • GREY «Do We Have an Unwritten Constitution?», Stanford Law Review, vol. 27, 1975.
  • ELY, J., «The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade», Yale Law Journal, vol. 82, 1973
  • BORK, R. H., The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of The Law, Free Press, New York, 1990, págs. 111-116.
  • POSNER, R., «The Uncertain Protection of Privacy in the Supreme Court», Supreme Court Review, 1979.
  • LUPIN, I., «Constitucional Theory and the Search for the Workable Premise», Dayton Law Review, vol. 8, 1983
  • GRANO, J., «Judicial Review and a Written Constitution in a Democratic Society», Wayne Law Review, vol. 28, 1981
  • DWORKING, R., «Unenumerated Rights», University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 59, 1992
  • HEYMANN, P. & BARZELAY, D., «The Forest and the Trees: Roe v. Wade and Its Critics», Boston University Law Review, vol. 53, 1973
  • REGAN, D., «Rewriting Roe v. Wade», Michigan Law Review, vol. 77, 1979,
  • ESTRICH, S. y SULLIVAN, K., «Abortion Politics: Writing for an Audience of One», University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 138, 1989,
  • MACKINNON, C., «Reflections on Sex Equality Under Law», Yale Law Journal, vol. 100, 1991,
  • SUNSTEIN, C., The Partial Constitution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1993, págs. 272-285;
  • SIEGEL, R., «Reasoning from the Body: A Historical Perspective on Abortion Regulation and Questions of Equal Protection», Stanford Law Review, vol. 44, 1992, págs. 350-380;
  • STRAUSS, D., «Abortion, Toleration and Moral Uncertainty», Supreme Court Review, 1992, págs. 18-22.
  • LAW, S., «Abortion Compromise-Inevitable and Impossible», University of Illinois Law Review, 1992, págs. 921-941.
  • WINKLER, A., «Fatal in Theory and Strict in Fact: An Empirical Analysis of Strict Scrutiny in the Federal Courts», Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 59, 2006, págs. 793-871.
  • BRIDGES, K. M., «Capturing the Judiciary: Carhart and the Undue Burden Standard», Washington and Lee Law Review, vol. 67, 2010, págs. 915-984;
  • SIEGEL, R. B., «Dignity and the Politics of Protection: Abortion Restrictions Under Casey/Carhart», Yale Low Journal, vol. 117, 2008
  • GARROW, D. J., «Significant Risks: Gonzales v. Carhart and the Future of Abortion Law», The Supreme Court Review, 2007, págs. 1-50.
  • IVEY, R., «Des- tabilizing Discourses: Blocking and Exploiting a New Discourse at Work in Gonzales V. Carhart», Virginia Law Review, vol. 94, 2008, págs. 1451-1508;
  • SUTER, S. M., «The ‘Repugnance’ Lens of Gonzales v. Carhart and Ot- her Theories of Reproductive Rights: Evaluating Advanced Reproductive Technologies», The George Washington Law Review, vol. 76, 2008,
  • RUBENFELD, J., «The Right of Privacy», Harvard Law Review, vol. 102, 1989, págs. 737-807.
  • RICHARDS, D. A. J., The Sodomy Cases: Bowers v. Hardwick and Lawrence v. Texas, University of Kansas, Lawrence, 2009;
  • TRIBE, L. H., «Lawrence v. Texas: The ‘Fundamental Right’ that Dare Not Speak Its Name», Harvard Law Review, vol. 117, núm. 6, 2004, págs. 1893-1955;
  • SUNSTEIN, C. R., «What Did Lawrence Hold? Of Autonomy, Desuetude, Sexuality, and Marriage», Supreme Court Review, vol. 2003, págs. 27-74.
  • ALLEN, M. P., «The Constitution at the Threshold of Life and Death: A Suggested Approach to Accommodate an Interest in Life and a Right to Die», American University Law Review, vol. 53, 2004, págs. 971-1020;
  • SUNSTEIN, C. R., «The Right to Die», Yale Law Journal, vol. 106, 1997, págs. 1123-1163;
  • FLICK, M. R., «The Due Process of Dying», California Law Review, vol. 79, 1991, págs. 1121- 1167;
  • KAMISAR, Y., «When Is There a Constitutional ‘Right to Die’? When Is There No Constitutional ‘Right to Live’?», Georgia Law Review, vol. 25, 1991, págs. 1203-1242.
  • SUHR, J. N., «Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health: A Clear and Convincing Call for Comprehensive Legislation to Protect Incompetent Patients’ Rights», The American University Law Review, vol. 40, 1991, págs. 1477-1519;
  • MAYO, Th. Wm., «Constitutionalizing the ‘Right to Die’», Maryland Law Review, vol. 49, 1990, págs. 103-155.
  • EATON, Th. A., y LARSON, E. J., «Experimenting with the ‘Right to Die’ in the Laboratory of the States», Georgia Law Review, vol. 25, 1991, págs. 1253-1326.
  • CHEMERINSKY, E., «Washington v. Glucksberg Was Tragically Wrong», Michingan Law Rewiew, vol. 106, 2008, págs. 1501-1516.
  • SAMAHA, A. M., «Undue Process: Con- gressional Referral and Judicial Resistance in the Schiavo Controversy», Constitutional Commentary, vol. 22, 2005, págs. 505-528.
  • CLARK, A. E., «The Right to Die: The Broken Road from Quinlan to Schiavo», Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, vol. 37, 2006, págs. 385-405;
  • CARTER, S., O., «The (Surprising) Truth about Schiavo: A Defeat for the Cause of Autonomy», Constitutional Commentary, vol. 22, 2005, págs. 383-404.
  • R. GELLMAN, Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape, Philip E. Agre y Marc Rotenberg (eds.), The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1997.
  • FRIED, C., «Privacy», The Yale Law Journal, vol. 77, 1967-1968, págs. 475-493
  • WESTIN, A. F., Privacy and Freedom, Atheneum, New York, 1967.
  • MILLER, A. R., The Assault on Privacy: Computers, Data Banks and Dossiers, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1971
  • MILLER «Personal Privacy in the Computer Age: The Challenge of a new Technology and Information Oriented Society», Michigan Law Review, vol. 67, 1969, págs. 1089-1246,
  • SCHWARTZ, P. M., «Privacy and Democracy in Cyberspace», Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 52, 1999, págs. 1609-1701;
  • SCHWARTZ, «Internet, Privacy and the State», Connecticut Law Review, vol. 32, 2000, págs. 815-859.
  • SOLOVE, D. J., ROTENBERG, M. y SCHWARTZ, P. M., Information Privacy Law, 3rd ed., Aspen Publishers, New York, 2009;
  • SCHWARTZ, P. M., y SOLOVE, D. J., Information Privacy: Status and R gulations 2010-2011, Aspen Publishers, 2009.
  • FLAHERTY, D. H., «On the Utility of Constitutional Rights to Privacy and Data Protection», Case Western Reserve Law Review, vol. 41, 1991, págs. 831-855
  • CHLAPOWSKI, F. S., «The Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy», Boston University Law Review, vol. 71, 1991
  • TURKINGTON, R. C., «Legacy of the Warren and Brandeis Article: The Emerging Unencumbered Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy», Northern Illinois University Law Review, vol. 10, 1989-1990, págs. 479-520.
  • KANG, J., «Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions», Stanford Law Review, vol. 50, 1998,
  • FROOMKIN, A. M., «Government Data Breaches», Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 24, 2009, págs. 1019-1060
  • SOLOVE, D. J. A., «A Taxonomy of Privacy», University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 154, 2006, págs. 477-560
  • CHLA- POWSKI, F. S., «The Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy», Boston University Law Review, vol. 71, 1991,
  • O’BRIEN, C. M., «Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12, Background Investigations, and Informational Privacy Rights», Mississippi Law Journal, vol. 80, 2010, págs. 299-353.
  • DOYLE, Ch., The Usa Patriot Act: A Legal Analysis, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, 2002;
  • WHITEHE- AD, J. W. y ADEN, S. H., «Forfeiting ‘Enduring Freedom’ for ‘Homeland Security’: A Constitutional Analysis of the Usa Patriot Act and the Justice Department’s Anti-Terrorism Initiatives», American University Law Review, vol. 51, 2002.
  • O’DONNEL, M. J. «Reading for Terrorism: Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act and the Constitutional Right to Information Privacy», Journal of Legislation, vol. 31, 2004, págs. 45- 68;
  • MADRINAN, P. G., «Devil in the Details: Constitutional Problems Inherent in the Surveillance Provisions of the Usa Patriot Act of 2001», University of Pittsburgh Law Review, vol. 64, 2003, págs. 783-834.
  • FROOMKIN, A. M., «The Death of Privacy?», Stanford Law Review, vol. 52, 2000, págs. 1461-1463.
  • CATE, F. H., Privacy in the Information Age, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 1997,
  • BRADY, R., «From Court to Country: A Legal, Social and Political Analysis of Privacy in the U.S., 1965-1974», Honors Projects, Paper 4, 2007.
  • SOLOVE, D. J., The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Informa- tion Age, New York University Press, New York, 2004,
  • SCHWARTZ, P. M., «Beyond Code for Internet Privacy: Cyberspace Filters, Privacy Controls, and Fair Information Practice», Wisconsin Law Review, 2000, págs. 743-788,
  • POST, R. C., «The Social Foundations of Privacy: Community and Self in the Common Law Tort», California Law Review, vol. 77, 1989, págs. 957- 1010,