If a statute specifies a remedy for violation, what cannot occur without due process?

The answer is based on the principle that due process protects individuals from being deprived of their rights, including statutory remedies, without fair procedures. When a statute provides a specific remedy for violations, individuals have a vested interest in that remedy. If a government entity or agency were to deprive an individual of that remedy unilaterally or without due process, it would violate the constitutional protections afforded to that individual.

Due process requires that if the government seeks to take something away—such as a legal remedy—it must provide notice and an opportunity for the affected party to be heard. This ensures fairness in legal proceedings and protects individuals from arbitrary actions by the state.

The other options pertain to actions that do not require due process in the same way. For example, modifying or repealing a statute is within the legislative authority and does not necessarily have to adhere to the same due process requirements, as it involves legislative action rather than a direct deprivation of an individual’s established rights or remedies. Interpretation of the remedy can often occur through judicial means without constituting a deprivation of it. This highlights the critical role that due process plays in protecting established rights against arbitrary deprival.