Opinion ID: 781963
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment claim (Count 5)

Text: 62 In Malik v. Arapahoe County Dep't of Soc. Servs., we held that it [is] clearly established law that, except in extraordinary circumstances, a parent has a liberty interest in familial association and privacy that cannot be violated without adequate pre-deprivation procedures. 191 F.3d 1306, 1315 (10th Cir.1999) (citations omitted). 26 In this case, defendants afforded the Roskas no process prior to removing Rusty. Defendants did not even attempt to obtain an ex parte order. Further, defendants point to no extraordinary circumstances that would justify the complete absence of pre-deprivation procedural safeguards. Although emergency circumstances which pose an immediate threat to the safety of a child might justify the absence of pre-deprivation procedures, Hollingsworth, 110 F.3d at 739, in this case, Rusty's health and safety were not in immediate danger. Thus, regarding plaintiffs' claim under the Fourteenth Amendment, clearly established law plainly put defendants on notice that their conduct violated the Constitution.