🇺🇸
Constitutional Law • Procedural Due Process
CONLAW#083
Legal Definition
A deprivation of liberty occurs where there is a loss of a significant freedom provided by the Constitution or a statute. Harm to reputation is not, itself, a loss of a liberty.
Plain English Explanation
The government can't take away someone's liberty without good reason. Liberty means basic freedoms that are protected by the Constitution or statutes. This includes things like the right to vote, travel, work in your profession, or raise your children. So if the government prevents you from doing these protected activities, it counts as depriving you of liberty. However, harm to your reputation, by itself, does not deprive you of liberty even if it hurts you socially. There has to be an actual loss of a tangible freedom.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob is arrested by the police and kept in jail without being told why or given a chance to see a judge. This means Bob has lost his freedom to go where he wants, which is a right given to him by law. Result: This is a clear case where Bob's liberty is taken away because he's been denied the freedom to move freely without a proper legal process.
Hypo 2: Sam is told by a government official that he is no longer allowed to attend public meetings because of his political views. This means Sam cannot participate in a public activity that he has the right to under the Constitution. Result: Sam has faced a deprivation of liberty because his right to freely participate in public life has been taken away without a justified reason.
Hypo 4: Sam is on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor that restricts him from leaving his house. This was ordered by a court after a fair trial. Result: This is a deprivation of liberty because Sam's freedom to go where he likes is restricted, but it's justified and legal because it follows a court's decision after a trial.
Hypo 2: Sam is told by a government official that he is no longer allowed to attend public meetings because of his political views. This means Sam cannot participate in a public activity that he has the right to under the Constitution. Result: Sam has faced a deprivation of liberty because his right to freely participate in public life has been taken away without a justified reason.
Hypo 4: Sam is on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor that restricts him from leaving his house. This was ordered by a court after a fair trial. Result: This is a deprivation of liberty because Sam's freedom to go where he likes is restricted, but it's justified and legal because it follows a court's decision after a trial.
Related Concepts
Does failure to protect people from harm violate Due Process?
What constitutes a deprivation of property?
What is Procedural Due Process?
What procedures are required for civil forfeitures?
What procedures are required for committing a person to a mental institution?
What procedures are required for corporal punishment in schools?
What procedures are required for detaining citizens as enemy combatants?
What procedures are required for ending Social Security Disability?
What procedures are required for ending welfare benefits?
What procedures are required for pre-judgment attachment and government seizures of property?
What procedures are required for proper Due Process?
What procedures are required for punitive damages?
What procedures are required for suspending a diver's license?
What procedures are required for suspending or dismissing a public school student?
What procedures are required for terminating a parent's custodial rights?
What procedures are required for terminating a tenured public employee for cause?
