Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing (1985)
- Docket
- 84-1273
- Decided
- 1985-01-01
Summary
Question: Did the University arbitrarily interfere with Ewing’s property, and therefore violate his right to Due Process under the Fourteenth Amendment, by revoking his admission to the medical program? Conclusion: No. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion for the unanimous Court. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizens a substantive right to own property free from arbitrary state interference. The Court held that, even if Ewing had a property interest in his admission, the careful consideration that went into his dismissal made this interference with his property anything but arbitrary. The Court determined that Ewing’s dismissal was reasonable based on all the available evidence. Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. filed a concurring opinion in which he argued that the classification of Ewing’s continued admission was not a constitutional property right deserving the protection of substantive due process, but rather a state issue requiring, at most, procedural due process protection.