Misplaced Pages

Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
(Redirected from Board of Regents v. Roth)

1972 United States Supreme Court case
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 18, 1972
Decided June 29, 1972
Full case nameBoard of Regents of State Colleges, et al. v. Roth
Citations408 U.S. 564 (more)92 S. Ct. 2701; 33 L. Ed. 2d 548; 1972 U.S. LEXIS 131; 1 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 23
Holding
The Fourteenth Amendment does not require opportunity for a hearing prior to the nonrenewal of a nontenured state teacher's contract unless he can show that the nonrenewal deprived him of an interest in "liberty" or that he had a "property" interest in continued employment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William O. Douglas · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
Case opinions
MajorityStewart, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Rehnquist
ConcurrenceBurger
DissentDouglas
DissentBrennan, joined by Douglas
DissentMarshall
Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV

Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court concerning alleged discrimination against a nontenured teacher at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh.

David Roth was hired as a first year assistant professor of political science in 1968 for a fixed term of one year, with a possibility of extension on mutual consent of the parties. In accordance with procedural rules set by the Board of Regents, the president of the University informed Roth he would not be rehired for the next academic year, giving him no reason for the decision and no opportunity to challenge it in any sort of hearing. The Board's employment rules provided opportunity for review of teachers "dismissed" before the end of the employment term, but did not extend these protections to teachers whose contracts were simply not renewed.

Roth brought suit in federal district court alleging that he was being punished for statements he had made that were critical of the university administration. He said the decision not to rehire him infringed his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. He also alleged that the university's failure to provide a hearing violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to procedural due process of law.

In an opinion delivered by Justice Stewart, the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment does not require an opportunity for a hearing prior to the nonrenewal of a nontenured state teacher's contract, unless he can show that the nonrenewal deprived him of an interest in "liberty" or that he had a "property" interest in continued employment, despite the lack of tenure or a formal contract.

Justice Douglas dissented, writing "When a violation of First Amendment rights is alleged, the reasons for dismissal or for nonrenewal of an employment contract must be examined to see if the reasons given are only a cloak for activity or attitudes protected by the Constitution."

Justice Marshall wrote a separate dissent saying that "every citizen who applies for a government job is entitled to it unless the government can establish some reason for denying the employment." He held government to higher scrutiny than private employers and said that government employees deserve "fair and adequate information" at their terminations in order to protect against arbitrary behavior.

See also

External links

United States First Amendment case law
Establishment Clause
Public displays
and ceremonies
Statutory religious
exemptions
Public funding
Religion in
public schools
Private religious speech
Internal church affairs
Taxpayer standing
Blue laws
Other
Free Exercise Clause
Exclusion of religion
from public benefits
Ministerial exception
Statutory religious exemptions
RFRA
RLUIPA
Freedom of speech (portal)
Unprotected
speech
Incitement
and sedition
Defamation and
false speech
Fighting words and
the heckler's veto
True threats
Obscenity
Speech integral
to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny
Overbreadth
Vagueness
Symbolic speech
versus conduct
Content-based
restrictions
Content-neutral
restrictions
In the
public forum
Designated
public forum
Nonpublic
forum
Compelled speech
Compelled subsidy
of others' speech
Compelled representation
Government grants
and subsidies
Government
as speaker
Loyalty oaths
School speech
Public employees
Hatch Act and
similar laws
Licensing and
restriction of speech
Commercial speech
Campaign finance
and political speech
Anonymous speech
State action
Official retaliation
Boycotts
Prisons
Freedom of the press
Prior restraints
and censorship
Privacy
Taxation and
privileges
Defamation
Broadcast media
Copyrighted materials
Freedom of assembly
Incorporation
Protection from prosecution
and state restrictions
Freedom of association
Organizations
Future Conduct
Solicitation
Membership restriction
Primaries and elections
Freedom to petition
United States administrative law
Concepts
Federal legislation
Regulations
Policies and manuals
Supreme Court decisions
Due Process
Judicial Review
Reviewability
Standard
Agency Action
The University of Wisconsin–Oshkosh
Campus facilities
Athletics
Media
Legal cases
Branch campuses
Related
Categories: