Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales

Gonzales v. Town of Castle Rock
Argued March 21, 2005
Decided June 27, 2005
Full case nameTown of Castle Rock, Colorado, Petitioner v. Jessica Gonzales, individually and as next of kin of her deceased minor children, Rebecca Gonzales, Katheryn Gonzales, and Leslie Gonzales
Docket no.04-278
Citations545 U.S. 748 (more)
125 S. Ct. 2796; 162 L. Ed. 2d 658; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 511
ArgumentOral argument
Case history
PriorGonzales v. City of Castle Rock, 307 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2002), on rehearing en banc, 366 F.3d 1093 (10th Cir. 2004); cert. granted, 543 U.S. 955 (2004).
SubsequentOn remand at Gonzales v. City of Castle Rock, 144 F. App'x 746 (10th Cir. 2005)
Holding
The town of Castle Rock, Colorado and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to enforce a restraining order against respondent's husband, as enforcement of the restraining order does not constitute a property right for 14th Amendment purposes.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityScalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
ConcurrenceSouter, joined by Breyer
DissentStevens, joined by Ginsburg
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV, Due Process Clause

Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for refusing to enforce a restraining order, even though the refusal led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband. This decision affirmed the controversial principle that state and local government officials have no affirmative duty to protect the public from harm it did not create; a similar ruling was made in DeShaney v. Winnebago County which involves Child Protective Services (called the Department of Social Services in the case) failing to protect a child from a violent parent. The decision has since become infamous and condemned by several human rights groups and is frequently cited among the worst Supreme Court decisions in modern history.