The Meyer decision is, as Matt and an anonymous con lawyer point out, highly relevant to understanding and criticizing the modern privacy cases starting with Griswold. Had almost anyone but Chuck Schumer raised it with Miers, I would say that its mention is a hopeful sign that these hearings (unlike John Roberts’s) will actually get down to business. But, as Matt says, the source is surely a sign that what we have here is some debaters’ “gotcha” tactic.
FYI: by “con lawyer” I mean no offense. I have in mind an attorney who specializes in constitutional law, not one who is a convicted felon.