Paul v. Davis - Impact

The U.S. Supreme Court held that the respondent's constitutional right to privacy was not affected by what they (tacitly) acknowledged was a defamatory publication. The salient consideration which arbitrated their finding was that no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment occurred because law enforcement had published an official record of fact which stated that the respondent was arrested for shoplifting. The respondent claimed that he was entitled to protection under due process because state officials stigmatized him and impeached his reputation; however, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause was not invokable in every case wherein the state might be named as litigant. Moreover, constitutional protection need not automatically be invoked when state torts provided means for redress. Finally, the Court clarified for lower courts that with respect to issues of defamation, constitutional protection could be extended only when the expectation of privacy was abridged as one of the liberties guaranteed (marriage, reproduction, contraception, education) under the Fourteenth Amendment.