Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Scholarship
Some scapegoats are innocent. Some warrant blame, but not the amount they are made to bear. Either way, scapegoating can allow in-groups to sidestep social problems by casting blame onto out-groups instead of confronting such problems—and the in-groups’ complicity in perpetuating them—directly.
This Essay suggests that it may be productive to view the Bivens regime’s rise as countering various exercises in scapegoating and its retrenchment as constituting an exercise in scapegoating. The earlier cases can be seen as responding to social structures that have scapegoated racial, economic, and other groups through overaggressive policing, mass incarceration, and inequitable government conduct more …
Going Rogue: The Supreme Court's Newfound Hostility To Policy-Based Bivens Claims, Joanna C. Schwartz, Alexander A. Reinert, James E. Pfander
Going Rogue: The Supreme Court's Newfound Hostility To Policy-Based Bivens Claims, Joanna C. Schwartz, Alexander A. Reinert, James E. Pfander
Faculty Articles
In Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017), the Supreme Court held that a proposed Bivens remedy was subject to an exacting special factors analysis when the claim arises in a “new context.” In Ziglar itself, the Court found the context of the plaintiffs’ claims to be “new” because, in the Court’s view, they challenged “large-scale policy decisions concerning the conditions of confinement imposed on hundreds of prisoners.” Bivens claims for damages caused by unconstitutional policies, the Court suggested, were inappropriate.
This Essay critically examines the Ziglar Court’s newfound hostility to policy-based Bivens claims. We show that an …
Recovering The Tort Remedy For Federal Official Wrongdoing, Gregory Sisk
Recovering The Tort Remedy For Federal Official Wrongdoing, Gregory Sisk
Notre Dame Law Review
As the Supreme Court weakens the Bivens constitutional tort cause of action and federal officers avoid liability for unlawful behavior through qualified immunity, we should recollect the merit of the common-law tort remedy for holding the federal government accountable for official wrongdoing. For more than a century after ratification of the Constitution, federal officers who trespassed on the rights of American citizens could be held personally liable under common-law tort theories, but then routinely were indemnified by the government.
The modern Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) roughly replicates the original regime for official wrongdoing by imposing liability directly on the …
Asking The First Question: Reframing Bivens After Minneci, Alexander A. Reinert, Lumen N. Mulligan
Asking The First Question: Reframing Bivens After Minneci, Alexander A. Reinert, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
In Minneci v. Pollard, decided in January 2012, the Supreme Court refused to recognize a Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents suit against employees of a privately run federal prison because state tort law provided an alternative remedy, thereby adding a federalism twist to what had been strictly a separation-of-powers debate. In this Article, we show why this new state-law focus is misguided. We first trace the Court’s prior alternative-remedies-to-Bivens holdings, illustrating that this history is one narrowly focused on separation of powers at the federal level. Minneci’s break with this tradition raises several concerns. On a doctrinal level, …
State Law, The Westfall Act, And The Nature Of The Bivens Question, Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Stephen I. Vladeck
State Law, The Westfall Act, And The Nature Of The Bivens Question, Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Stephen I. Vladeck
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In a number of recent cases touching to varying degrees on national security, different courts of appeals have applied a strong presumption against recognition of a Bivens cause of action. In each of these cases, the courts’ approach was based on the belief that the creation of a cause of action is a legislative function and that the courts would be usurping Congress’s role if they recognized a Bivens action without legislative authorization. Thus, faced with a scenario where they believed that the remedial possibilities were either "Bivens or nothing," these courts of appeals chose nothing.
The concerns that …
Asking The First Question: Reframing Bivens After Minneci, Alexander A. Reinert, Lumen N. Mulligan
Asking The First Question: Reframing Bivens After Minneci, Alexander A. Reinert, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Articles
In Minneci v. Pollard, decided in January 2012, the Supreme Court refused to recognize a Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents suit against employees of a privately run federal prison because state tort law provided an alternative remedy, thereby adding a federalism twist to what had been strictly a separation-of-powers debate. In this Article, we show why this new state-law focus is misguided. We first trace the Court’s prior alternative-remedies-to-Bivens holdings, illustrating that this history is one narrowly focused on separation of powers at the federal level. Minneci’s break with this tradition raises several concerns. On a …
Measuring The Success Of Bivens Litigation And Its Consequences For The Individual Liability Model, Alexander A. Reinert
Measuring The Success Of Bivens Litigation And Its Consequences For The Individual Liability Model, Alexander A. Reinert
Faculty Articles
In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U. S. 388 (1971), the Supreme Court held that the Federal Constitution provides a cause of action in damages for violations of the Fourth Amendment by individual federal officers. The so-called "Bivens "cause of action—initially extended to other constitutional provisions and then sharply curtailed over the past two decades—has been a subject of controversy among academics and judges since its creation. The most common criticism of Bivens—one that has been repeated in different venues for thirty years— is that the Court's individual liability model, in …
Why Bivens Won't Die: The Legacy Of Peoples V. Cca Detention Centers, Lumen N. Mulligan
Why Bivens Won't Die: The Legacy Of Peoples V. Cca Detention Centers, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
Interpreting recent Supreme Court precedent, the Tenth Circuit, in Peoples v. CCA Detention Centers, held that a federal prisoner confined in a privately run prison may not bring a Bivens suit against the employees of the private prison for violations of his constitutional rights when alternative state-law causes of action are available. The author first reviews the Supreme Court's evolving Bivens jurisprudence and turns next to an overview of the Tenth Circuit's opinion. Third, the author argues that, despite the Tenth Circuit's new approach, putative constitutional claims brought under state-law theories of recovery will often be re-federalized, producing uniform federal …
Brown V. State Of New York: Judge Simons Says New York State Can Be Held Liable For Money Damages, Eric J. Stockel
Brown V. State Of New York: Judge Simons Says New York State Can Be Held Liable For Money Damages, Eric J. Stockel
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Using The Constitution: Separation Of Powers And Damages For Constitutional Violations, James A. Thomson
Using The Constitution: Separation Of Powers And Damages For Constitutional Violations, James A. Thomson
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Qualified Immunity Doctrine In The Supreme Court: Judicial Activism And The Restriction Of Constitutional Rights, David Rudovsky
The Qualified Immunity Doctrine In The Supreme Court: Judicial Activism And The Restriction Of Constitutional Rights, David Rudovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Municipal Liability For Torts Committed By Volunteer Anticrime Groups, Henry C. Collins
Municipal Liability For Torts Committed By Volunteer Anticrime Groups, Henry C. Collins
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Volunteer anticrime groups are effective in deterring crime by exercising the statutory power to effect citizen's arrest. As a result of using this statutory authority though, the municipality may face liability, for example, where a volunteer anticrime group effected an unlawful arrest, or for use of excessive force against the arrested individual. This comment explores what a plaintiff must prove when he proceeds under various causes of action: an action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, a state law, or a Bivens-type cause of action, in order to recover against a municipality for torts committed by anticrime volunteer groups. The Comment …