Amber Wright v. State of Washington

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Amber Wright (‘Wright”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendants-Appellees State of Washington, Department of Social and Health Services and Bruce Morrison (“the state defendants”) on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 substantive due process claim. We affirm.

In determining whether a state actor is entitled to qualified immunity, we must consider whether the plaintiff has alleged facts showing that the state actor violated a statutory or constitutional right, and, if so, whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, — U.S. -, -, 131 S.Ct. 2074, 2080 , 179 L.Ed.2d 1149 (2011). Here, the district court correctly determined that Wright’s claim failed at the first step of the analysis.

Contrary to Wright’s arguments, her case is not materially distinguishable from DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 , 109 S.Ct. 998 , 103 L.Ed.2d 249 (1989). Thus, the district court properly concluded that there is no basis for departing from the rule that the Due Process Clause generally does not protect individuals from violence by private actors. Id. at 197 ,…