Procedural due process: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:59, 23 January 2025

Latest revision as of 17:00, 24 March 2025

(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 2:

{{Distinguish|Substantive due process}}

'''Procedural due process''' is a [[legal doctrine]] in the [[United States]] that requires government officials to follow fair procedures before depriving a person of [[life]], [[liberty]], or [[property]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite booksfn|title = Administrative Law: Agency Action in Legal Context|last = Glicksman|first = Robert L.Levy|publisher = Foundation Press|year = 2010|___location p= 9781599416106|last2 = Levy|first2 = Richard E.}}</ref>{{Rp|657}} When the government seeks to deprive a person of one of those interests, procedural due process requires at least for the government to afford the person notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a decision made by a neutral decisionmaker. Procedural due process is required by the [[Due Process Clause]]s of the [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fifth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth]] Amendments to the [[US Constitution|United States Constitution]].<ref name=":0" />{{Rpsfn|Glicksman|Levy|2010|p=617}}

The article "Some Kind of Hearing" written by Judge [[Henry Friendly]] created a list of basic due process rights "that remains highly influential, as to both content and relative priority."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Friendly |first=Henry |date=1975-06-01 |title=Some Kind of Hearing |url=https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol123/iss6/2/ |journal=[[University of Pennsylvania Law Review]] |volume=123 |issue=6 |pages=12671267–1317 }}</ref> The rights, which apply equally to civil due process and criminal due process, are the following:<ref name="Strauss Due Process Rights">{{cite web |last=Strauss |first=Peter |title=DUE PROCESS |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process |access-date=8 March 2013 |publisher=[[Legal Information Institute]]}}</ref>

# An unbiased tribunal.

# Notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it.

Line 19:

== References ==

{{reflist}}

<references />

==Sources==

* {{cite book |last1=Glicksman |first1=Robert L. |last2=Levy |first2=Richard E. |title=Administrative Law: Agency Action in Legal Context |date=2010 |publisher=Foundation Press/Thomson Reuters |isbn=978-1-59941-610-6 }}

==Further reading==

* {{cite journal |last1=Eberle |first1=Edward |title=Procedural Due Process: The Original Understanding. |journal=Constitutional Commentary |date=1987 |id={{CORE output|76347743}} |url=https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/293/ }}

* {{cite journal |last1=Chemerinsky |first1=Erwin |title=Procedural Due Process Claims |journal=Touro Law Review |date=6 April 2016 |volume=16 |issue=3 |url=https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol16/iss3/12/ }}

* {{cite journal |last1=Redish |first1=Martin H. |last2=Marshall |first2=Lawrence C. |title=Adjudicatory Independence and the Values of Procedural Due Process |journal=The Yale Law Journal |date=1986 |volume=95 |issue=3 |pages=455–505 |id={{CORE output|160249325}} |doi=10.2307/796487 |jstor=796487 |hdl=20.500.13051/16382 |hdl-access=free }}

* {{cite journal |last1=Grossi |first1=Simona |title=Procedural Due Process |journal=Seton Hall Circuit Review |date=28 August 2017 |volume=13 |issue=2 |id={{CORE output|151531836}} |ssrn=2935505 |url=https://scholarship.shu.edu/circuit_review/vol13/iss2/1/ }}

* {{cite journal |last1=Rubin |first1=Peter J. |title=Square Pegs and round Holes: Substantive Due Process, Procedural Due Process, and the Bill of Rights |journal=Columbia Law Review |date=2003 |volume=103 |issue=4 |pages=833–892 |doi=10.2307/1123779 |jstor=1123779 }}

* {{cite book |doi=10.4159/9780674059733-010 |jstor=j.ctv1smjtdq.14 |chapter=The Myths of Substantive Due Process |title=The Constitution and the New Deal |date=2000 |pages=241–268 |isbn=978-0-674-05973-3 |last1=White |first1=G. Edward |publisher=Harvard University Press }}

[[Category:American legal terminology]]