In the case of Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 1971, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on whether a non-tenured teacher's contract could be terminated without providing reasons or offering an opportunity for a hearing. David Roth was hired as an assistant professor at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh and after serving one academic year, his contract was not renewed but no reason was given nor did he receive any form of hearing. The court held that due process under the Fourteenth Amendment does not require cause or a hearing when deciding not to rehire teachers who lack tenure or contractual right to reemployment beyond their current terms. This decision is based on two factors: first, because Mr.Roth’s employment expectation was limited by his one-year term; secondly, it found that reputation alone is insufficient to invoke due process protections unless coupled with some more tangible interest such as continued employment.

In the dissenting opinion for Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately protect an individual’s right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. He disagreed with their interpretation that a non-tenured professor did not have a property interest in continued employment and thus was not entitled to procedural protections when his contract was not renewed. He contended that any person who is deprived of livelihood by state action should be given notice and opportunity for hearing, regardless if they had tenure or contractual guarantee of continued employment. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's distinction between "property" and "liberty," arguing it created unnecessary confusion about what constituted protected interests under due process clause.