Whisenhunt v. Spradlin

Background

A patrolwoman and a police sergeant in Amarillo, Texas, dated and spent nights together while both worked for the city police department. The sergeant told his supervisor about the relationship and was told living together was not acceptable; the two kept separate residences. The chief later ordered detectives to watch them off duty, and the department disciplined both officers for nonmarital "cohabitation," suspending each for twelve days and demoting the sergeant to patrolman. There was no evidence their work suffered, no prior discipline for similar conduct, and state law did not criminalize their relationship.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court declined to review the Fifth Circuit’s decision that upheld the discipline, so the Court did not resolve the legal questions on the merits. The central legal question was whether disciplining public employees for private, lawful, consensual relationships violates the requirement that people get fair warning about forbidden conduct and whether it intrudes on a fundamental privacy interest. In a published dissent, one Justice argued the department’s rules were too vague, gave no prior notice, and that private intimacy implicates a strong privacy right needing clear justification.

Real world impact

Because the Court denied review, the suspensions and demotion remain in place and the lower-court ruling stands. The denial leaves unresolved whether and when public employers may punish off-duty, private relationships and allows continuing disagreement among lower courts. The officers resigned after the publicity and discipline.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissenting Justice would have taken the case to address fair-notice and privacy protections for public employees and to resolve splits among lower courts.