The Public–Private Distinction: Insights for Public Administration from the State Action Doctrine

Abstract

Public administration scholars continue to grapple with how and why public organizations diff er from private organizations. Th e judiciary deals with similar questions in ruling on constitutional claims that apply exclusively to state actors. Th e authors consider similarities and diff erences between scholarly and judicial approaches, adding to the body of research attempting to capture the complexities of the public-private distinction. Th e application in this article includes the coding of seminal court decisions and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to fi nd combinations of causal conditions that lead to state action rulings. Th e specifi cs revealed through QCA provide valuable lessons for extending public norms and preserving constitutional protections when outsourcing public services. Practitioner Points• Public managers continue to grapple with distinguishing "public" from "private." Meanwhile the courts apply the State Action Doctrine to distinguish state actors from private actors in order to determine the boundaries for constitutional protections. • Public administrators should be knowledgable about the State Action Doctrine; its application has critical implications for contracting and the extension of constitutional protections. • When public managers outsource services to private actors they can craft contract language to guarantee constitutional protections, thereby fi lling any constitutional voids that may result from defi ning an actor as "private."

Variations in employees' perceptions of organizational disaster preparedness

“…Studies comparing organizational sectors have primarily focused on understanding the similarities and differences between public and private organizations, with a focus on publicness (see Andrews et al, ; Bozeman & Bretschneider, ; Bozeman & Moulton, ; Malatesta & Carboni, ; Moulton, ; Moulton & Eckerd, ). Publicness broadly refers to the extent to which an organization has public ties and is constrained or influenced by political authority (Bozeman, ; Bozeman & Bretschneider, ).…”

Citizens' Blame of Politicians for Public Service Failure: Experimental Evidence about Blame Reduction through Delegation and Contracting

“…However, legal responsibility cannot always be passed on to avoid liability. For example, in the United States, “state action” has frequently been adjudicated to extend into public tasks handled by privately owned contractors (Malatesta and Carboni ). The blame theory of contracting suggests, regardless of the legal position, that citizens may hold politicians less to blame when a service is contracted out because the contractors play an active role in service delivery.…”

Ex Post Contract Market Structure: Implications for Performance Over Time

“…For example, it is unclear whether private organizations are liable for upholding constitutional rights of prisoners. Although the Supreme Court has held multiple times that private actors can engage in public action in state action doctrine cases, it is difficult to ascribe public action to private actors based on connection to government alone (Malatesta & Carboni, 2015). These questions are especially timely given that the number of juveniles in custody has declined in recent years, but the use of contracted programs has increased.…”