Fourteenth Amendment (Due Process & Equal Protection)

What It Is

The Fourteenth Amendment does two things that matter for § 1983:

1. Due Process Clause: “No State shall… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”
2. Equal Protection Clause: “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”

It also incorporates most of the Bill of Rights against state governments. Without the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment wouldn’t apply to local police at all.

Due Process: Procedural vs. Substantive

Procedural due process means the government must give you notice and an opportunity to be heard before depriving you of life, liberty, or property. Did you get a hearing? Were you told the charges? Could you respond?

Substantive due process means some government conduct is so outrageous that no amount of process can justify it. It protects fundamental rights — bodily integrity, freedom from arbitrary government action — regardless of the procedures used.

In § 1983 cases, substantive due process claims arise when:

• Pretrial detainees face unconstitutional conditions (this is Fourteenth Amendment, not Eighth, because they haven’t been convicted)
• Officials engage in conduct that “shocks the conscience”
• Government action is arbitrary and irrational

The mental state standard under the Fourteenth Amendment varies by claim. Excessive force against pretrial detainees uses objective reasonableness (after Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015)). Conditions of confinement and medical care claims require deliberate indifference. Substantive due process claims require conduct that shocks the conscience — the highest bar in § 1983. Equal protection claims require proof of intentional discrimination.

Equal Protection

Equal protection claims in § 1983 allege that the government treated you differently from similarly situated people without a rational basis — or, if a protected class is involved (race, religion, national origin), without a compelling interest.

Selective enforcement: Police arrested you for something they routinely ignore when others do it. If the selective enforcement is based on race or another protected characteristic, it’s an equal protection violation.

Class-of-one: Even without a protected class, you can claim equal protection if you were intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated, with no rational basis. Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000).

The “More Specific Provision” Rule

Important: if a more specific constitutional provision covers your claim, use that instead of the Fourteenth Amendment. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) held that excessive force during arrest is a Fourth Amendment claim, not Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process.

Use the Fourteenth Amendment when:

• You’re a pretrial detainee (not yet convicted)
• The conduct doesn’t fit neatly under a more specific amendment
• You’re alleging equal protection, not just a liberty deprivation

Key Cases

• Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) — Three-factor test for procedural due process
• County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998) — “Shocks the conscience” standard for substantive due process
• Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000) — Class-of-one equal protection
• Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979) — Pretrial detainee conditions analyzed under Fourteenth Amendment