 Furthermore, they ruled that the DSS could not be found liable, as a matter of constitutional law, for failure to protect Joshua DeShaney from a private actor.Although there exist conditions in which the state (or a subsidiary agency, like a county department of social services) is obligated to provide protection against private actors, and failure to do so is a violation of Fourteenth Amendment rights, the court reasoned,

Since Joshua DeShaney was not in the custody of the DSS, the DSS was not required to protect him from harm.In reaching this conclusion, the court opinion relied heavily on its precedents in "Estelle v. Gamble" and "Youngberg v. Romeo".