Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and state statutes or regulations. Id. With respect to interests arising directly under the Due Process Clause, the Supreme Court has narrowly circumscribed its scope to protect no more than the “the most basic liberty interests in prisoners.” Hewitt v. Helms,’459 U.S. 460, 467, 108 S.Ct. 864, 869, 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983); Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 555, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2974, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974) (“Lawful imprisonment necessarily makes unavailable many rights and privileges of the ordinary citizen.”). The Due Process Clause does not protect against “every change in the conditions of confinement having a substantial adverse impact” on inmates, Sandin, 515 U.S. at 478, 115 S.Ct. at 2297, if S.Ct. 1028, 1036-37, 108 L.Ed.2d 178 (1990) (<HOLDING>). Aside from the Fourteenth Amendment Due 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the due process clause permits the state to treat a prison inmate who has a serious mental illness with antipsychotic drugs against his will if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest (B) recognizing right to refuse psychotropic medication in the absence of emergency as aspect of liberty guaranteed by due process clause (C) holding that inmate has a liberty interest under the due process clause to refuse the involuntary administration of psychotropic drugs (D) holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate (E) holding that prisoners possess a significant liberty interest in avoiding the unwanted administration of antipsychotic drugs under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment and identifying procedures which comported with due process
Output (English): holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate