Roe v. wade is considered explicitly overruled, as well as considered wrongly decided in the first place, as of 2022 (Dobbs).

They also explicitly stated a constitutional right to privacy does not exist, and pointed out that Casey abandoned any such reliance on this sort of claim.

Griswold also found a right to marital privacy. Not general privacy.

Griswold is also barely considered good law anymore, though i admit it has not been explicitly overruled - it is definitely on the chopping block, as more than just Thomas has said.

In any case, more importantly, none of them have found any interesting right to privacy of the kind we are talking about here, but instead more specific rights to privacy in certain contexts. Griswold found a right to marital privacy in "the penumbra of the bill of rights". Lawrence found a right to privacy in your sexual activity.

In dobbs, they explicitly further denied a right to general privacy, and argued previous decisions conflated these: " As to precedent, citing a broad array of cases, the Court found support for a constitutional “right of personal privacy.” Id., at 152. But Roe conflated the right to shield information from disclosure and the right to make and implement important personal decisions without governmental interference."

You are talking about the former, which none of these cases were about. They are all about the latter.

So this is very far afield from a general right to privacy of the kind we are talking about, and more importantly, one that would cover anything like OpenAI chats.

So basically, you have a ~200 year period where it was not considered a right, and then a 50 year period where specific forms of privacy were considered a right, and now we are just about back to the former.

The kind of privacy we are talking about here ("the right to shield information from disclosure") has always been subject to a balancing of interests made by legislatures, rather than a constitutional right upon which they may not infringe. Example abound - you actually don't have to look any further than court filings themselves, and when you are allowed to proceed anonymously or redact/file things under seal. The right to public access is considered much stronger than your right to not want the public to know embarassing or highly private things about your life. There are very few exceptions (minors, etc).

Again, i don't claim any of this is how it is should be. But it's definitely how it is.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The supreme court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 and explicitly stated in their ruling that a constitutional right to privacy does not exist.