Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An adjective characterizing a legal act, instrument, assertion, or observation that lacks confirmation, validation, factual enhancement, or supporting detail.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Aerial Observation From Lawful Airspace
Neville Norton enclosed his backyard with a tall fence and opaque covers over prototype parts. Federal agents flew a fixed-wing aircraft at 1,000 feet in public airspace and identified the parts using only the naked eye. The court held the observation was not a search because any member of the public in the same airspace could have seen the same items.
Conclusory Conspiracy Allegation
Naveen Nanda sued several telecom firms alleging they conspired to fix prices. The complaint stated only that the defendants engaged in parallel pricing conduct and a naked assertion of agreement. The court dismissed the claim because the bare statement lacked factual enhancement showing a meeting of the minds.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Dictionaries
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly550 U.S. 544, 556, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007)
Private Benefit Transfer Challenge
Nathan Nguyen owned waterfront property targeted by the city for redevelopment. The city planned to transfer the land to a private developer after condemnation. The owner argued the taking was a naked attempt to benefit one private party at the expense of another.
Kelo, et al. v. City of New London545 U.S. 469, 503 (2005)
Discovery Demand For Witness Statements
Nicholas Nunez sought production of all written statements obtained by defense counsel from tugboat crew members. The request contained no showing of need or undue hardship. The court treated the request as a naked general demand and upheld the refusal to produce the materials.
Hickman v. Taylor329 U.S. 495, 507 (1949)
Policy Preference In Rights Analysis
Nigel Nelson challenged a state marriage restriction as violating due process. The state defended the law solely on traditional definitions of marriage. The opinion rejected the defense as resting on nothing more than naked policy preferences untethered to constitutional text.
Obergefell v. Hodges576 U.S. 644 (2015)
Gun-Free School Zone Statute
Nyah Ndlovu was prosecuted under a federal statute banning firearms within 1,000 feet of a school. The government offered no congressional findings linking the prohibition to interstate commerce. The Court noted the absence of findings left any substantial effect on commerce invisible to the naked eye.
United States v. Lopez514 U.S. 549 (1995)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
What does a naked assertion mean in federal pleading?+
A naked assertion is a conclusory statement of an element or claim without supporting factual allegations. Courts disregard such statements when evaluating a motion to dismiss and require well-pleaded facts that make the claim plausible rather than merely possible.
When is police use of the naked eye from an aircraft not a Fourth Amendment search?+
Observation from a fixed-wing aircraft in lawful public airspace using only the naked eye is not a search. Any member of the public flying in the same airspace could have seen the same things, so no reasonable expectation of privacy is invaded.
How does a naked demand affect discovery of witness statements?+
A naked general demand for materials without any showing of need or undue hardship is insufficient to overcome work-product protection. The requesting party must demonstrate a specific reason why production is justified under the circumstances.
What distinguishes a naked policy preference from a valid constitutional argument?+
A naked policy preference rests solely on the decision-maker's own view of desirable outcomes without grounding in constitutional text, history, or precedent. Courts reject such preferences when they substitute for actual legal analysis.
576 U.S. 644 (2015)Legislation and Regulation
…19. Whatever force that belief may have as a matter of moral philosophy, it has no more basis in the Constitution than did the naked policy preferences adopted in Lochner . See 198 U.S., at 61 (“We do not believe in the soundness of the views which uphold this law,” which “is an illegal interference with the rights of…