Youngberg v. Romeo | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued January 11, 1982 Decided June 18, 1982 | |
Full case name | Duane Youngberg, Superintendent, Pennhurst State School and Hospital, et al. v. Nicholas Romeo, an incompetent, by his mother and next friend, Romeo |
Citations | 457 U.S. 307 (more) 102 S. Ct. 2452; 73 L. Ed. 2d 28; 1982 U.S. LEXIS 128; 50 U.S.L.W. 4681 |
Argument | Oral argument |
Case history | |
Prior | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. |
Holding | |
Involuntarily committed residents have protected liberty interests under the Due Process Clause to reasonably safe conditions of confinement, freedom from unreasonable bodily restraints, and such minimally adequate training as reasonably may be required by these interests. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Powell, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor |
Concurrence | Blackmun, joined by Brennan, O'Connor |
Concurrence | Burger (in the judgment) |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. XIV |
Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307 (1982), was a landmark[1] United States Supreme Court case regarding the rights of the involuntarily committed and those with intellectual disabilities. Nicholas Romeo had an intellectual disability with an infant level IQ and was committed to a Pennsylvania state hospital. He was restrained for 9 months straight out of his 11 month stay and repeatedly abused. [2] The Supreme Court agreed with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals that involuntarily committed residents had the right to reasonably safe confinement conditions, no unreasonable body restraints and the habilitation they reasonably require.