Paul v. Davis | |
---|---|
Argued November 4, 1975 Decided March 23, 1976 | |
Full case name | Paul, Chief of Police, Louisville, et al. v. Davis |
Citations | 424 U.S. 693 (more) |
Case history | |
Prior | Davis v. Paul, 505 F.2d 1180 (6th Cir. 1974); cert. granted, 421 U.S. 909 (1975). |
Subsequent | Rehearing denied, 425 U.S. 985 (1976); affirmed on remand, Davis v. Paul, 538 F.2d 328 (6th Cir. 1976). |
Holding | |
Reputation alone is not a constitutionally protected interest. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell |
Dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall, White (in part) |
Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. XIV; 42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976), is a United States Supreme Court case in which a sharply divided Court held that the plaintiff, whom the local police chief had named an "active shoplifter," suffered no deprivation of liberty resulting from injury to his reputation.[1] In the case, the court broke from precedents and restricted the definition of the constitutional right to privacy "to matters relating to 'marriage procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education".