Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 

Supreme Court of the United States

1972

Chapter

6

Title

Implied Fundamental Rights

Page

943

Topic

Procedural Due Process

Quick Notes

In Roth, plaintiff was given a non-tenured one-year contract to teach at Wisconsin State University. The University declined, without giving reasons, to hire him after the one-year period. Under Wisconsin law, decisions on hiring for non-tenured positions were left totally to the discretion of University officials.

Holding

o         The Supreme Court held that plaintiff's interest in being rehired was not an interest in "liberty" or "property," and that he therefore had no right to procedural due process.

Requirements of Procedural Due Process

o         The requirements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interests encompassed by the Fourteenth Amendment's protection of life, liberty, and property.

o         Burden of proof is on the plaintiff.

o         When protected interests are implicated, the due process clause is trigger and the right to some kind of prior hearing is paramount.

o         But the range of interests protected by procedural due process is not infinite.

Reasoning

o         The Court's opinion emphasized that the "weight" (the importance) of the plaintiff's interest was irrelevant; it was the "nature" of that interest that counted.

Legitimate Claim of entitlement which people rely in their daily lives.

o         He must have a legitimate claim of entitlement to it.

o         It is a purpose of the ancient institution of property to protect those claims upon which people rely in their daily lives, reliance that must not be arbitrarily undermined.

o    It is a purpose of the constitutional right to a hearing to provide an opportunity for a person to vindicate those claims.

Not a Property Interest - Teaching job was defined by terms of his appointment

o         The respondent's "property" interest in employment at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh was created and defined by the terms of his appointment.

o    The terms secured his interest in employment up to June 30, 1969.

o    The terms specifically provided the employment was to terminate on June 30.

o    They did not provide for contract renewal absent "sufficient cause."

o    The terms secured absolutely no interest in re-employment for the next year.

o    They supported absolutely no possible claim of entitlement to re-employment.

Book Name

Constitutional Law : Stone, Seidman, Sunstein, Tushnet.  ISBN:  978-0-7355-7719-0

Issue

o         Whether Roth has a procedural due process right to a statement of reasons and a hearing on the Universitys decision not to rehire him for another year?  No, because his property interest was limited to the terms of his appointment.

Procedure

Trial

o         The lower court granted summary judgment on the procedural issue and ordered the university to provide the professor with reasons and a hearing.

Appellant

o         United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which held that respondent professor was wrongfully terminated from his teaching job in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process

Supreme

o         The Court held that the professor had no protected interest in continued employment, as he had completed his contracted for term, therefore, there could be no Fourteenth Amendment protection. The decision of the lower court and the appellate court was reversed and the case was remanded

Facts/Cases

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules/Laws

Pl -   Board of Regents

Df -   Roth

Description

o          Roth was hired for a one-year term as an assistance professor at Wisconsin State University.

o         The president of the university informed Roth that he would not be rehired; no explanation was given for the decision, and there was no opportunity to challenge it.

o         Roth alleged that the failure to hold a hearing violated the due process clause.

Justice Stewart

o         Rejected Roths claim.

Requirements of Procedural Due Process

o         The requirements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interests encompassed by the Fourteenth Amendment's protection of life, liberty, and property.

o         Burden of proof is on the plaintiff.

o         When protected interests are implicated, the due process clause is trigger and the right to some kind of prior hearing is paramount.

o         But the range of interests protected by procedural due process is not infinite.

Determining whether due process requirements apply

o         Look to the nature of the interest at stake.

Not attempted to define exactness of liberty

o         Some things have definitely been stated

o         Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also

o    the right of the individual to contract,

o    to engage in any of the common occupations of life,

o    to acquire useful knowledge, \

o    to marry, establish a home and bring up children,

o    to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and

o    generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized . . . as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."

o    Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399. In a Constitution for a free people, there can be no doubt that the meaning of "liberty" must be broad indeed.

Fourteenth Amendment - Safeguard for property interests

o         The Fourteenth Amendment's procedural protection of property is a safeguard of the security of interests that a person has already acquired in specific benefits. These interests -- property interests -- may take many forms.

Welfare benefits - Eligibility is an interest, safeguarded by procedural due process

o         Thus, the Court has held that a person receiving welfare benefits under statutory and administrative standards defining eligibility for them has an interest in continued receipt of those benefits that is safeguarded by procedural due process.

Requirement to have a property interest in a benefit

o         A person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it.

o         He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it.

Legitimate Claim of entitlement which people rely in their daily lives.

o         He must have a legitimate claim of entitlement to it.

o         It is a purpose of the ancient institution of property to protect those claims upon which people rely in their daily lives, reliance that must not be arbitrarily undermined.

o    It is a purpose of the constitutional right to a hearing to provide an opportunity for a person to vindicate those claims.

Property Interest - Welfare recipients created and defined

o         Just as the welfare recipients' "property" interest in welfare payments was created and defined by statutory terms.

Property Interest - Teaching job was defined by terms of his appointment

o         The respondent's "property" interest in employment at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh was created and defined by the terms of his appointment.

o    The terms secured his interest in employment up to June 30, 1969.

o    The terms specifically provided the employment was to terminate on June 30.

o    They did not provide for contract renewal absent "sufficient cause."

o    The terms secured absolutely no interest in re-employment for the next year.

o    They supported absolutely no possible claim of entitlement to re-employment.

Abstract Concern - Being rehired - No a property interest

o         In these circumstances, the respondent surely had an abstract concern in being rehired, but he did not have a property interest sufficient to require the University authorities to give him a hearing when they declined to renew his contract of employment.

Rules

Requirements of Procedural Due Process

o         The requirements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interests encompassed by the Fourteenth Amendment's protection of life, liberty, and property.

o         Burden of proof is on the plaintiff.

o         When protected interests are implicated, the due process clause is trigger and the right to some kind of prior hearing is paramount.

o         But the range of interests protected by procedural due process is not infinite.

Class Notes