Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Derek Anthony Davis, proceeding pro se, sued New Orleans Police Department officers Alexis Salay and John Castelin under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court construed his complaint as alleging that the officers violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause by declining to enforce a restraining order against his former romantic partner and by failing to arrest her for an alleged robbery and assault.
Davis alleged that his former partner took a job directly across the street from his workplace despite an order requiring her to remain 100 yards away. According to Davis, the officers declined to enforce the order because she was not bothering him and was merely working there. The district court dismissed the claim and denied leave to amend. Davis did not appeal the dismissal of his Title VII claims or the dismissal of his claims against city attorney Bernard Blair on prosecutorial-immunity grounds.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed. Applying Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the court held that Davis lacked a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest in having the restraining order enforced or his former partner arrested. Louisiana law leaves police at least as much enforcement discretion as the Colorado law considered in Castle Rock, so its direction that officers use every reasonable means to enforce a restraining order did not create an entitlement protected by the Due Process Clause.
The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying leave to amend. Davis’s proposed amendment was futile because it still did not plausibly identify a constitutionally protected property interest apart from enforcement of the restraining order and therefore would not have survived a motion to dismiss.
Key Takeaways
- A person generally has no Fourteenth Amendment entitlement to compel police to arrest someone or enforce a restraining order.
- Louisiana’s restraining-order enforcement language does not eliminate police discretion sufficiently to create a protected property interest.
- A court may deny a pro se plaintiff leave to amend when the proposed amendment would remain legally insufficient.
Why It Matters
The decision applies Castle Rock to Louisiana restraining orders and confirms that statutory language directing officers to use reasonable enforcement means does not create an individual federal due-process right to police action. Plaintiffs challenging nonenforcement under § 1983 must identify a distinct constitutionally protected liberty or property interest, not merely an expectation that officers will enforce an order or make an arrest.