The decision in Griswold v. Connecticut was based upon the idea that the Constitution protects a right to privacy, specifically a marital right to privacy, even though this right is not explicitly mentioned in the text of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the Connecticut law banning the use of contraceptives by married couples violated this right to marital privacy, which is found within the "penumbras," or emanations, of several constitutional guarantees in the Bill of Rights, including the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments

. The Court reasoned that the right to privacy is an implicit fundamental right that exists in the "zone of privacy" surrounding the marital relationship, and that the government could not intrude on this private sphere by banning contraception for married couples

. Justice William O. Douglas, writing for the majority, emphasized that the Constitution protects certain unenumerated rights that flow from the explicit guarantees, and that privacy within marriage is one such right that predates the Constitution itself

. Thus, the idea underlying the decision is that the Constitution, through its various amendments, implicitly guarantees a right to privacy in intimate matters such as contraception use by married couples, and the state law criminalizing this violated that constitutional right

. This ruling laid the foundation for later cases expanding privacy rights in matters of contraception, abortion, and sexual conduct

. The correct choice from the options you provided is:

• If the Constitution forbids unreasonable searches, there must be a reasonable right to privacy.

This reflects the Court's reasoning that the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and other constitutional guarantees imply a broader right to privacy that the state cannot infringe upon in marital matters