Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/04pdf/04-278.pdf
Page Number: 10.0

Cite as:  545 U. S. ____ (2005) 

7 

Opinion of the Court 

564,  577  (1972).    Such  entitlements  are  “ ‘of  course,  . . .  not 
created  by  the  Constitution.    Rather,  they  are  created  and 
their  dimensions  are  defined  by  existing  rules  or  under-
standings  that  stem  from  an  independent  source  such  as 
state law.’ ”  Paul v. Davis, 424 U. S. 693, 709 (1976) (quot-
ing  Roth,  supra,  at  577);  see  also  Phillips  v.  Washington 
Legal Foundation, 524 U. S. 156, 164 (1998). 

A 
Our  cases  recognize  that  a  benefit  is  not  a  protected 
entitlement if government officials may grant or deny it in 
their discretion.  See, e.g., Kentucky Dept. of Corrections v. 
Thompson,  490  U. S.  454,  462–463  (1989).    The  Court  of 
Appeals  in  this  case  determined  that  Colorado  law  created 
an  entitlement  to  enforcement  of  the  restraining  order 
because  the  “court-issued  restraining  order  . . .  specifically 
dictated that its terms must be enforced” and a “state stat-
ute  command[ed]”  enforcement  of  the  order  when  certain 
objective conditions were met (probable cause to believe that 
the order had been violated and that the object of the order 
had received notice of its existence).  366 F. 3d, at 1101, n. 5; 
see  also  id.,  at  1100,  n. 4;  id.,  at  1104–1105,  and  n. 9.  Re-
spondent  contends  that  we  are  obliged  “to  give  deference
to  the  Tenth  Circuit’s  analysis  of  Colorado  law  on” 
whether  she  had  an  entitlement  to  enforcement  of  the 
restraining order.  Tr. of Oral Arg. 52. 

We will not, of course, defer to the Tenth Circuit on the 
ultimate  issue:  whether  what  Colorado  law  has  given 
respondent constitutes a property interest for purposes of 
the Fourteenth Amendment.  That determination, despite
its  state-law  underpinnings,  is  ultimately  one  of  federal 
constitutional law.  “Although the  underlying  substantive 
interest is created by ‘an independent source such as state 
law,’  federal  constitutional  law  determines  whether  that 
interest  rises  to  the  level  of  a  ‘legitimate  claim  of  entitle-
ment’  protected  by  the  Due  Process  Clause.”    Memphis