Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Gonzales Vs. Castle Rock

The Supreme Court case of Gonzales v. Castle Rock pertains to the enforcement of a restraining order by the Castle Rock Police Department, and the murder of three young children (Gonzales v. Castle Rock, No. 04-278, 2005). Previously, Jessica Gonzales sought a restraining against her estranged husband Simon Gonzalez because his behavior was scaring her and the children. Furthermore, listed in the testimony of the restraining order, Jessica revealed the facts concerning Simon's disturbing behavior beginning with his attempted suicide in front of her and the girls (Leung, 2005). Additionally, Jessica listed in the restraining order that Simon stalked and broke into their home on several occasions, which placed their daughters and she in fear

Ultimately, a state trial court granted the restraining order for Jessica and the girls, and the restraining order contained specific conditions for visitation between Simon and the girls (Gonzales v. Castle Rock, No. 04-278, 2005). Consequently, Simon abducted the girls for several hours before he drove to the Castle Rock Police Department, where he fired several shots at the police station with a semi-automatic gun (Leung, 2005). In the aftermath, Simon was killed by officers of the Castle Rock Police Department, and the girls were found dead inside of the vehicle (Leung, 2005). Thus, Jessica Gonzales filed a 30 million dollars lawsuit against the city of Castle Rock stating that the city of Castle Rock violated the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, since the police department failed to an arrest when there was an evident violation of the restraining occurred (Leung, 2005). Furthermore, Jessica cited the town's action in response to the restraining order were willfully, recklessly, or so grossly negligent as to indicate wanton disregard and indifference to the respondent's civil rights (Gonzales v. Castle Rock, No. 04-278, 2005). Since we now are aware of the facts of the case, let us examine the Supreme

You shall arrest, or, if an arrest would be impractical under the circumstances, seek a warrant for the arrest of the restrained person you have information amounting to probable cause that the restrained person has violated or attempted to violate any provision of this order, and the restrained person has been properly served with a copy of this order or has received actual notice of the existence of this order (Gonzales v. Castle Rock, No. 04-278, 2005). Subsequently, after analyzing the mandatory arrest terminology in the Colorado restraining order instructions, the Supreme Court reviewed if the city of Castle Rock denied Mrs. Gonzales' Fourteenth Amendment right to procedural due process through the inadequate enforcement of the restraining order. After months of deliberation, the Supreme Court render a ruling citing that the city of Castle Rock could not be held liable for the ambiguous instructions written in state's restraining order and there was no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, since Mrs. Gonzales did not have a property interest in the enforcement of the restraining order against her husband (Gonzales v. Castle Rock, No. 04-278, 2005). Furthermore, it is impractical to assume that town's custom or policy prevented the