cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/16-7079/16-7079-2018-08-27.pdf

By Connie Reguli

In this case a minor child sued for wrongful removal and violation of substantive due Process rights.

One of the most difficult aspects of a civil rights case is overcoming immunity. In this case the social workers and law enforcement officers claimed qualified immunity for violating the child’s (fourth amendment rights) and substantive due process rights of familial integrity when the child was removed from school for a forensic interview and told by the law enforcement officer that they were going to find him a better home.

In this appeal the tenth circuit court said that the case could proceed on violations of fourth amendment violations. However the court dismissed the claims for substantive due process rights stating that it was not “clearly established” that the child had the right of family integrity in this situation, that is, the fact that the officials impugned his father and damaged his relationship with him was not enough.

Note – analysis of substantive due process – the courts consideration of (1) a fundamental liberty interest vs (2) shock the conscious conduct by state actors.

Good analysis of the reasonableness standard in a claim for fourth amendment violations.

Note. The child was not removed from his home and the Interview revealed no disclosures of abuse.

Here are some excerpts:

The court compares fundamental right to the shocks the conscience standard. –

What is conscious shocking conduct?

Court says that they have implicitly used that standard before.

What you must show for violations of the substantive due process violations of family integrity.

By Connie Reguli