in 1948. She was the only woman in her graduating class at Yale. In 1955, Roraback took over her family's solo practice in Canaan, Connecticut. She inherited the practice from her uncle, J. Clinton Roraback, who was a trial lawyer. The practice was founded in 1873 by her grandfather, Alberto Roraback. She continued the solo practice in Canaan until her death in 2007. Throughout her early career, she participated in many controversial cases, such as a Smith Act trial in Connecticut in the 1950s, in which she defended members of the Communist party such as Ladislaus "Laddie" Michalowski, a Progressive organizer whom Roraback represented in front of the House Un-American Activities Committee. Career Griswold v. Connecticut Catherine Roraback's participation in the Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut began with the case's predecessor, Poe v. Ullman. In the late 1950s, the 1879 law banning contraceptives in Connecticut became a prominent issue for many women. Planned Parenthood executive director Estelle Griswold realized that the law was out of date and posed medical problems. She and Yale University chief of obstetrics and gynecology, Dr. Lee Buxton, along with Yale Law School professor Fowler Harper, took the issue to the Supreme Court, with Roraback leading the litigation. Roraback argued that the banning of contraceptives was a medical concern for women and a problem for married couples, and should be overturned. However, the Supreme Court ruled that because the law had never been enforced, it was not a serious issue and voted 5–4 to keep the law in place. As a result, Griswold and Buxton decided to test whether or not the law would be enforced, and opened a birth control clinic in New Haven. The clinic was shut down almost immediately and Griswold and Buxton were arrested and found guilty of violating the law by providing birth control. The case was taken to court, with Catherine Roraback representing Griswold and Buxton. She took a different approach to this case and argued that the law violated the right to privacy for married couples. During the trial, Roraback continued to argue the right to privacy for married couples. However, after a brief time, it was understood that the Connecticut courts were not going to change their stance on birth control and Roraback would lose the case. The courts valued the moral issues of the law too greatly to effect a change. While defending Griswold and Buxton