The U.S. Supreme Court case Hewitt et al. v. Helms, 1982 revolved around the issue of whether administrative segregation in a prison constituted a deprivation of liberty without due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The respondent, Thomas Helms, was an inmate at Pennsylvania's State Correctional Institution who had been placed in administrative custody following his involvement in two violent incidents within the institution. He argued that this confinement violated his constitutional rights as he was not given any opportunity for review or appeal against it. However, the court ruled 6-3 in favor of Hewitt (representing Pennsylvania Department of Corrections), stating that while prisoners do have certain protected liberties under the Constitution, these do not extend to remaining free from administrative segregation when there is reasonable cause to believe they pose a threat to safety and order within prisons. The majority opinion held that such measures were part and parcel of prison management and did not constitute additional punishment or violate due process rights if used appropriately by authorities based on valid concerns about institutional security.

In the dissenting opinion for Hewitt et al. v. Helms, Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Marshall and Blackmun, argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately protect prisoners' constitutional rights. They contended that administrative segregation could be used as a pretext for punitive confinement without due process protections if it was not subject to judicial review. The dissenters also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Pennsylvania law on administrative segregation; they believed this law created a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause because it placed substantive limitations on official discretion and mandated specific procedures before an inmate could be segregated from general population in prison. They further criticized the majority’s reliance on procedural safeguards provided after placement in administrative segregation rather than those available prior to such placement which is more crucial according to them.