Also known as: state actions · state actor
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional doctrine requiring that most individual rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution receive protection only against interference by governmental entities or by private conduct fairly attributable to the state. Attribution occurs when a private party performs a traditional public function or when the state is sufficiently entwined with the private conduct through regulation, funding, or judicial enforcement. The doctrine ensures that constitutional commands apply solely to state action and not to purely private behavior.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Sean Steele, a private civil plaintiff, exercises peremptory challenges to exclude Black jurors from the panel in his contract dispute. The trial court oversees the selection process and enforces the strikes without objection. Because jury selection is a traditional public function performed with significant court participation, the discriminatory use of the challenges constitutes state action subject to equal protection scrutiny.
Samuel Soto, a Black buyer, contracts to purchase a home from a willing seller. Neighboring property owners sue in state court to enforce a racially restrictive covenant in the deed that bars sale to nonwhite purchasers. The court's enforcement of the covenant supplies the requisite state action, rendering the restriction subject to equal protection limits.
Steven Silva, a beneficiary of a common trust fund, receives only publication notice of a judicial accounting proceeding that will bind his interest. The state court administers the proceeding under statutory authority and approves the accounts. The court's involvement in the notice and adjudication process constitutes state action that must satisfy due process standards.
Stephen Shaw, a physician, provides contraceptive advice to married patients in violation of a state statute. State officials prosecute him under the law. The enactment and enforcement of the criminal prohibition by state actors supplies the state action necessary to trigger constitutional review of the statute.
Sydney Santos, a physician, performs an abortion for a patient seeking to terminate her pregnancy. State prosecutors charge her under a criminal statute that broadly prohibits the procedure. The state's enactment and enforcement of the prohibition constitutes state action that subjects the statute to constitutional scrutiny.
Santiago Sanchez, owner of Grand Central Terminal, seeks to construct an office tower above the station. The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, a municipal agency, denies the application under its preservation ordinance. The commission's regulatory action is state action that must be evaluated under the Takings Clause.
Private conduct qualifies when the actor performs a function traditionally and exclusively reserved to the state, such as operating a company town or conducting jury selection. Courts examine whether the function has been delegated and whether the private party steps into the state's shoes. Judicial enforcement of private agreements can also supply state action when the court lends its authority to unconstitutional private conduct.
Mere acquiescence or failure to prevent private discrimination does not amount to state action. The state must affirmatively participate through enforcement, regulation, or significant entanglement. Judicial enforcement of a private discriminatory agreement, however, crosses the line into state action.
…This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to…
…Appellants concede that the preservation of buildings of historical or aesthetic importance is a permissible objective of state action
…Clause. And in Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, supra , the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment protects from arbitrary state action the right to pursue an occupation, such as the practice of law. [^maj-3]: See, e. g. , Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Chicago , 166 U. S. 226; Gitlow v. New York, supra ; Cantwell v.…
…that and nothing more.”[^maj-6] It cannot be doubted that among the civil rights intended to be protected from discriminatory state action by the Fourteenth Amendment are the rights to acquire, enjoy, own and dispose of property. Equality in the enjoyment of property rights was regarded by the framers of that Amendment as an…
…The case is here on appeal under 28 U. S. C. § 1257. Common trust fund legislation is addressed to a problem appropriate for state action
A public defender does not act under color of state law when performing traditional lawyer functions for a client. Malpractice or negligence by the defender therefore does not itself constitute state action that violates due process. The defender's role is adversarial rather than governmental.
Equal protection claims require state action, so purely private refusals to sell or rent do not trigger the clause. When a state agency or court enforces discriminatory housing policies or covenants, however, the involvement supplies state action and subjects the conduct to constitutional review.