ziglar
abbasi
et
argued
january
decided
june
immediate
aftermath
september
terrorist
attacks
federal
government
ordered
hundreds
illegal
aliens
taken
custody
held
pending
determination
whether
particular
detainee
connections
terrorism
respondents
six
men
arab
south
asian
descent
detained
periods
three
six
months
federal
facility
brooklyn
release
removed
filed
putative
class
action
petitioners
two
groups
federal
officials
first
group
consisted
former
attorney
general
john
ashcroft
former
federal
bureau
investigation
director
robert
mueller
former
immigration
naturalization
service
commissioner
james
ziglar
executive
officials
second
group
consisted
facility
warden
assistant
warden
dennis
hasty
james
sherman
wardens
respondents
sought
damages
constitutional
violations
implied
cause
action
theory
adopted
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
alleging
petitioners
detained
harsh
pretrial
conditions
punitive
purpose
violation
fifth
amendment
petitioners
actual
apparent
race
religion
national
origin
violation
fifth
amendment
wardens
subjected
punitive
strip
searches
violation
fourth
fifth
amendments
wardens
knowingly
allowed
guards
abuse
violation
fifth
amendment
respondents
also
brought
claim
forbids
certain
conspiracies
violate
equal
protection
rights
district
dismissed
claims
executive
officials
allowed
claims
wardens
go
forward
second
circuit
affirmed
respects
wardens
reversed
executive
officials
reinstating
respondents
claims
held
judgment
reversed
part
vacated
remanded
part
reversed
part
vacated
remanded
part
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
except
part
concluding
limited
reach
bivens
action
informs
decision
whether
implied
damages
remedy
recognized
pp
congress
provided
specific
damages
remedy
plaintiffs
whose
constitutional
rights
violated
state
officials
congress
provided
corresponding
remedy
constitutional
violations
agents
federal
government
background
recognized
bivens
implied
damages
action
compensate
persons
injured
federal
officers
violated
fourth
amendment
prohibition
unreasonable
searches
seizures
following
decade
allowed
remedies
twice
fifth
amendment
case
davis
passman
eighth
amendment
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
case
carlson
green
cases
approved
implied
damages
remedy
constitution
pp
bivens
davis
carlson
decided
time
prevailing
law
assumed
proper
judicial
function
provide
remedies
necessary
make
effective
statute
purpose
case
borak
since
adopted
far
cautious
course
clarifying
deciding
whether
recognize
implied
cause
action
determinative
question
one
statutory
intent
alexander
sandoval
statute
evince
congress
intent
create
private
right
action
asserted
touche
ross
redington
action
created
judicial
mandate
similar
caution
must
exercised
respect
damages
actions
implied
enforce
constitution
bivens
law
context
expanding
bivens
remedy
considered
disfavored
judicial
activity
ashcroft
iqbal
party
seeks
assert
implied
cause
action
constitution
principles
central
analysis
question
whether
congress
courts
decide
authorize
damages
suit
bush
lucas
often
congress
bivens
extended
new
context
factors
counselling
hesitation
absence
affirmative
action
congress
carlson
supra
sound
reasons
think
congress
might
doubt
efficacy
necessity
damages
remedy
part
system
enforcing
law
correcting
wrong
courts
must
refrain
creating
kind
remedy
alternative
remedial
structure
may
also
limit
judiciary
power
infer
new
bivens
cause
action
pp
considering
relevant
special
factors
remedy
extended
claims
challenging
confinement
conditions
imposed
respondents
pursuant
formal
policy
adopted
executive
officials
wake
september
attacks
detention
policy
claims
include
allegations
petitioners
violated
respondents
due
process
equal
protection
rights
holding
restrictive
conditions
confinement
allegations
wardens
violated
fourth
fifth
amendments
subjecting
respondents
frequent
strip
searches
detention
policy
claims
include
claim
warden
hasty
pp
proper
test
determining
whether
claim
arises
new
bivens
context
follows
case
different
meaningful
way
previous
bivens
cases
decided
context
new
meaningful
differences
may
include
rank
officers
involved
constitutional
right
issue
extent
judicial
guidance
official
conduct
risk
disruptive
intrusion
judiciary
functioning
branches
presence
potential
special
factors
considered
previous
bivens
cases
respondents
detention
policy
claims
bear
little
resemblance
three
bivens
claims
approved
previous
cases
second
circuit
thus
held
new
bivens
context
performed
special
factors
analysis
allowing
damages
suit
proceed
pp
special
factors
indicate
congress
courts
decide
whether
damages
action
allowed
regard
executive
officials
bivens
action
proper
vehicle
altering
entity
policy
correctional
services
malesko
designed
hold
officers
responsible
acts
subordinates
see
iqbal
supra
even
action
confined
executive
officers
discrete
conduct
call
question
formulation
implementation
executive
policy
burdens
litigation
prevent
officials
properly
discharging
duties
see
cheney
dist
litigation
process
might
also
implicate
discussion
deliberations
led
formation
particular
policy
requiring
courts
interfere
sensitive
executive
branch
functions
see
clinton
jones
special
factors
counsel
extending
bivens
cover
detention
policy
claims
petitioners
claims
challenge
major
elements
government
response
september
attacks
necessarily
require
inquiry
issues
policy
however
prerogative
congress
president
courts
reluctant
intrude
upon
authority
absent
congressional
authorization
department
navy
egan
thus
congress
failure
provide
damages
remedy
might
mere
oversight
silence
might
inadvertent
schweiker
chilicky
silence
also
relevant
telling
congress
nearly
years
extend
kind
remedies
sought
respondents
done
respondents
also
may
available
alternative
forms
judicial
relief
minneci
pollard
including
injunctions
habeas
petitions
proper
balance
situations
like
deterring
constitutional
violations
freeing
high
officials
make
lawful
decisions
necessary
protect
nation
times
great
peril
one
congress
undertake
judiciary
second
circuit
thus
erred
allowing
respondents
detention
policy
claims
proceed
bivens
pp
second
circuit
also
erred
allowing
prisoner
abuse
claim
warden
hasty
go
forward
without
conducting
required
special
factors
analysis
respondents
prisoner
abuse
allegations
warden
hasty
state
plausible
ground
find
constitutional
violation
bivens
remedy
implied
first
question
whether
claim
arises
new
bivens
context
claim
significant
parallels
carlson
extended
bivens
cover
failure
provide
medical
care
prisoner
claim
nevertheless
seeks
extend
carlson
new
context
constitutional
right
different
carlson
predicated
eighth
amendment
claim
predicated
fifth
judicial
guidance
available
warden
respect
supervisory
duties
less
developed
might
alternative
remedies
available
congress
provide
standalone
damages
remedy
federal
jailers
enacted
prison
litigation
reform
act
years
carlson
given
expressed
caution
extending
bivens
remedy
context
must
regarded
new
one
pp
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
respect
respondents
claims
pp
assuming
respondents
allegations
true
well
pleaded
question
whether
reasonable
officer
petitioners
position
known
alleged
conduct
unlawful
conspiracy
inquiry
turns
objective
legal
reasonableness
official
acts
harlow
fitzgerald
assessed
light
legal
rules
established
time
action
taken
anderson
creighton
clear
reasonable
officer
alleged
conduct
unlawful
situation
confronted
saucier
katz
defendant
officer
entitled
qualified
immunity
reasonable
officer
might
known
conduct
unlawful
officer
entitled
qualified
immunity
pp
reasonable
officials
petitioners
positions
known
sufficient
certainty
prohibited
joint
consultations
resulting
policies
two
reasons
first
conspiracy
alleged
among
officers
department
federal
government
clearly
established
law
issue
whether
agents
executive
department
distinct
enough
conspire
one
another
within
meaning
second
open
discussion
among
federal
officers
encouraged
help
officials
reach
consensus
department
policies
reasonable
argument
liability
extend
cases
like
one
considerations
indicate
question
whether
federal
officials
said
conspire
kinds
situations
sufficiently
open
officials
suit
known
applied
discussions
actions
follows
reasonable
officers
petitioners
positions
known
certainty
alleged
agreements
forbidden
statute
pp
kennedy
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
ii
iii
roberts
thomas
alito
joined
opinion
respect
part
roberts
alito
joined
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
sotomayor
kagan
gorsuch
took
part
consideration
decision
cases
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
nos
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
except
part
september
terrorist
attacks
country
response
deaths
destruction
dangers
caused
government
ordered
hundreds
illegal
aliens
taken
custody
held
pending
determination
whether
particular
detainee
connections
terrorism
custody
harsh
conditions
described
continued
many
instances
custody
lasted
days
weeks
stretching
months
later
aliens
detained
filed
suit
leading
cases
complaint
named
defendants
three
high
executive
officers
department
justice
two
wardens
facility
detainees
held
claims
alleging
various
constitutional
violations
sought
damages
implied
cause
action
theory
adopted
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
another
claim
complaint
based
upon
statutory
cause
action
authorized
created
congress
rev
stat
statutory
cause
action
allows
damages
persons
injured
conspiracies
deprive
equal
protection
laws
suit
commenced
district
eastern
district
new
york
decision
ashcroft
iqbal
fourth
amended
complaint
filed
complaint
considered
motions
dismiss
fourth
amended
complaint
denied
defendants
granted
others
rulings
subject
interlocutory
appeals
appeals
second
circuit
dissenting
opinion
judge
raggi
respect
decision
panel
second
unsigned
dissent
declining
rehear
suit
en
banc
joined
judge
raggi
five
judges
appeals
ruled
complaint
sufficient
action
proceed
named
officials
us
see
turkmen
hasty
panel
decision
turkmen
hasty
en
banc
decision
granted
certiorari
consider
rulings
officials
must
defend
suit
merits
ruling
appeals
petitioners
former
detainees
seek
relief
fourth
amended
complaint
respondents
various
claims
theories
advanced
recovery
grounds
asserted
dismissal
insufficient
matter
law
addressed
turn
given
present
procedural
posture
suit
accepts
true
facts
alleged
complaint
see
iqbal
weeks
following
september
terrorist
attacks
worst
american
history
federal
bureau
investigation
fbi
received
tips
members
public
see
tips
based
suspicion
terrorist
activity
many
others
may
based
fear
arabs
muslims
fbi
agents
questioned
people
suspected
links
september
attacks
particular
terrorism
general
ibid
investigating
tips
including
less
substantiated
ones
fbi
encountered
many
aliens
present
country
without
legal
authorization
result
individuals
arrested
detained
immigration
charges
ibid
fbi
designated
alien
interest
investigation
processed
according
normal
procedures
words
alien
treated
example
arrested
border
illegal
entry
however
fbi
designated
alien
interest
investigation
doubts
proper
designation
particular
case
alien
detained
subject
policy
aliens
held
without
bail
respondents
among
aliens
subject
policy
detained
metropolitan
detention
center
mdc
brooklyn
new
york
held
administrative
maximum
special
housing
unit
unit
mdc
complaint
includes
allegations
conditions
unit
harsh
pursuant
official
bureau
prisons
policy
detainees
held
cells
hours
day
lights
cells
left
hours
detainees
little
opportunity
exercise
recreation
forbidden
keep
anything
cells
even
basic
hygiene
products
soap
toothbrush
removed
cells
reason
shackled
escorted
four
guards
denied
access
forms
communication
outside
world
strip
searched
often
time
moved
well
random
cells
harsh
conditions
unit
imposed
pursuant
official
policy
according
complaint
prison
guards
engaged
pattern
physical
verbal
abuse
ibid
guards
allegedly
slammed
detainees
walls
twisted
arms
wrists
fingers
broke
bones
referred
terrorists
threatened
violence
subjected
humiliating
sexual
comments
insulted
religion
respondents
six
men
arab
south
asian
descent
five
muslims
illegally
country
arrested
course
september
investigation
detained
administrative
maximum
special
housing
unit
periods
ranging
three
eight
months
released
respondents
removed
respondents
sued
behalf
behalf
putative
class
seeking
compensatory
punitive
damages
attorney
fees
costs
respondents
seems
fair
conclude
arguments
presented
acknowledge
ordinary
course
aliens
present
without
legal
authorization
detained
period
time
challenge
conditions
confinement
reasons
motives
imposing
conditions
gravamen
claims
government
reason
suspect
connection
terrorism
thus
legitimate
reason
hold
long
harsh
conditions
relevant
respondents
sued
two
groups
federal
officials
official
capacities
first
group
consisted
former
attorney
general
john
ashcroft
former
fbi
director
robert
mueller
former
immigration
naturalization
service
commissioner
james
ziglar
opinion
refers
three
petitioners
executive
officials
petitioners
named
complaint
mdc
warden
dennis
hasty
associate
warden
james
sherman
opinion
refers
two
petitioners
wardens
seeking
invoke
decision
bivens
respondents
brought
four
claims
constitution
first
respondents
alleged
petitioners
detained
harsh
pretrial
conditions
punitive
purpose
violation
substantive
due
process
component
fifth
amendment
second
respondents
alleged
petitioners
detained
harsh
conditions
actual
apparent
race
religion
national
origin
violation
equal
protection
component
fifth
amendment
third
respondents
alleged
wardens
subjected
punitive
strip
searches
unrelated
legitimate
penological
interest
violation
fourth
amendment
substantive
due
process
component
fifth
amendment
fourth
respondents
alleged
wardens
knowingly
allowed
guards
abuse
respondents
violation
substantive
due
process
component
fifth
amendment
respondents
also
brought
claim
forbids
certain
conspiracies
violate
equal
protection
rights
respondents
alleged
petitioners
conspired
one
another
hold
respondents
harsh
conditions
actual
apparent
race
religion
national
origin
district
dismissed
claims
executive
officials
allowed
claims
wardens
go
forward
appeals
affirmed
respects
wardens
though
held
prisoner
abuse
claim
sherman
associate
warden
dismissed
executive
officials
however
appeals
reversed
reinstating
respondents
claims
ibid
noted
judge
raggi
dissented
held
prisoner
abuse
claim
hasty
go
forward
opinion
concurring
part
judgment
dissenting
part
appeals
declined
rehear
suit
en
banc
noted
judge
raggi
joined
second
dissent
along
five
judges
granted
certiorari
ii
first
question
discussed
whether
petitioners
sued
damages
bivens
ensuing
cases
defining
reach
limits
precedent
congress
passed
statute
later
codified
rev
stat
entitles
injured
person
money
damages
state
official
violates
constitutional
rights
congress
create
analogous
statute
federal
officials
indeed
years
leading
bivens
congress
provide
specific
damages
remedy
plaintiffs
whose
constitutional
rights
violated
agents
federal
government
background
decided
bivens
held
even
absent
statutory
authorization
enforce
damages
remedy
compensate
persons
injured
federal
officers
violated
prohibition
unreasonable
search
seizures
see
acknowledged
fourth
amendment
provide
money
damages
many
words
noted
however
congress
foreclosed
damages
remedy
explicit
terms
special
factors
suggested
judiciary
hesitat
face
congressional
silence
accordingly
held
authorize
remedy
general
principles
federal
jurisdiction
see
citing
bell
hood
decade
followed
recognized
come
called
implied
cause
action
two
cases
involving
constitutional
violations
davis
passman
administrative
assistant
sued
congressman
firing
woman
held
fifth
amendment
due
process
clause
gave
damages
remedy
gender
discrimination
carlson
green
prisoner
estate
sued
federal
jailers
failing
treat
prisoner
asthma
held
eighth
amendment
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
gave
damages
remedy
failure
provide
adequate
medical
treatment
see
three
cases
bivens
davis
carlson
represent
instances
approved
implied
damages
remedy
constitution
understand
bivens
two
cases
implying
damages
remedy
constitution
necessary
understand
prevailing
law
decided
century
followed
different
approach
recognizing
implied
causes
action
follows
ancien
regime
alexander
sandoval
assumed
proper
judicial
function
provide
remedies
necessary
make
effective
statute
purpose
case
borak
thus
routine
matter
respect
statutes
imply
causes
action
explicit
statutory
text
see
allen
state
bd
elections
sullivan
little
hunting
park
existence
statutory
right
implies
existence
necessary
appropriate
remedies
statutory
decisions
place
bivens
recognized
implied
cause
action
remedy
constitutional
violation
background
bivens
decision
held
courts
must
adjust
remedies
grant
necessary
relief
federally
protected
rights
invaded
quoting
bell
supra
see
also
harlan
concurring
discussing
cases
recognizing
implied
causes
action
federal
statutes
light
interpretive
framework
possibility
keep
expanding
bivens
became
substantial
equivalent
kent
damages
different
bivens
national
security
cal
rev
later
arguments
recognizing
implied
causes
action
damages
began
lose
force
cases
decided
bivens
statutory
implied
cases
bivens
relied
upon
adopted
far
cautious
course
finding
implied
causes
action
two
principal
cases
statutes
declined
find
implied
cause
action
see
piper
industries
cort
ash
later
cannon
university
chicago
allow
implied
cause
action
cautioned
congress
intends
private
litigants
cause
action
far
better
course
congress
confer
remedy
explicit
terms
following
expressed
caution
clarified
series
cases
deciding
whether
recognize
implied
cause
action
determinative
question
one
statutory
intent
sandoval
statute
displa
intent
create
private
remedy
cause
action
exist
courts
may
create
one
matter
desirable
might
policy
matter
compatible
statute
see
also
transamerica
mortgage
advisors
lewis
karahalios
federal
employees
held
judicial
task
instead
limited
solely
determining
whether
congress
intended
create
private
right
action
asserted
touche
ross
redington
statute
provide
private
cause
action
created
judicial
mandate
see
transamerica
supra
decision
recognize
implied
cause
action
statute
involves
somewhat
different
considerations
question
whether
recognize
implied
cause
action
enforce
provision
constitution
congress
enacts
statute
specific
procedures
times
considering
terms
proper
means
enforcement
logical
assume
congress
explicit
intends
create
private
cause
action
respect
constitution
however
single
specific
congressional
action
consider
interpret
even
significant
step
principles
determine
authority
judicial
power
create
enforce
cause
action
damages
federal
officials
order
remedy
constitutional
violation
determining
whether
traditional
equitable
powers
suffice
give
necessary
constitutional
protection
whether
addition
damages
remedy
necessary
number
economic
governmental
concerns
consider
claims
federal
officials
often
create
substantial
costs
form
defense
indemnification
congress
substantial
responsibility
determine
whether
extent
monetary
liabilities
imposed
upon
individual
officers
employees
federal
government
addition
time
administrative
costs
attendant
upon
intrusions
resulting
discovery
trial
process
significant
factors
considered
analogous
context
congress
fair
assume
weighed
concerns
deciding
substitute
government
defendant
suits
seeking
damages
constitutional
violations
see
providing
certain
provisions
federal
tort
claims
act
apply
claim
federal
employee
brought
violation
constitution
reasons
expressed
caution
implied
causes
actions
congressional
statutes
led
similar
caution
respect
actions
bivens
context
action
implied
enforce
constitution
indeed
light
changes
general
approach
recognizing
implied
damages
remedies
possible
analysis
three
bivens
cases
might
different
decided
today
sure
congressional
enactment
disapproved
decisions
must
understood
opinion
intended
cast
doubt
continued
force
even
necessity
bivens
context
arose
bivens
vindicate
constitution
allowing
redress
injuries
provides
instruction
guidance
federal
law
enforcement
officers
going
forward
settled
law
bivens
common
recurrent
sphere
law
enforcement
undoubted
reliance
upon
fixed
principle
law
powerful
reasons
retain
sphere
given
notable
change
approach
recognizing
implied
causes
action
however
made
clear
expanding
bivens
remedy
disfavored
judicial
activity
iqbal
accord
observation
consistently
refused
extend
bivens
new
context
new
category
defendants
correctional
services
malesko
indeed
refused
past
years
example
declined
create
implied
damages
remedy
following
cases
first
amendment
suit
federal
employer
bush
lucas
suit
military
officers
chappell
wallace
substantive
due
process
suit
military
officers
stanley
procedural
due
process
suit
social
security
officials
schweiker
chilicky
procedural
due
process
suit
federal
agency
wrongful
termination
fdic
meyer
eighth
amendment
suit
private
prison
operator
malesko
supra
due
process
suit
officials
bureau
land
management
wilkie
robbins
eighth
amendment
suit
prison
guards
private
prison
minneci
pollard
party
seeks
assert
implied
cause
action
constitution
party
seeks
assert
implied
cause
action
federal
statute
principles
central
analysis
question
decide
whether
provide
damages
remedy
congress
courts
bush
answer
often
congress
issue
host
considerations
must
weighed
appraised
committed
write
rather
interpret
ibid
quoting
gilman
instances
precedents
instruct
legislature
better
position
consider
public
interest
imposing
substantive
legal
liability
schweiker
supra
quoting
bush
supra
result
urged
caution
extending
bivens
remedies
new
context
malesko
supra
precedents
make
clear
bivens
remedy
available
factors
counselling
hesitation
absence
affirmative
action
congress
carlson
quoting
bivens
defined
phrase
special
factors
counselling
hesitation
necessary
inference
though
inquiry
must
concentrate
whether
judiciary
well
suited
absent
congressional
action
instruction
consider
weigh
costs
benefits
allowing
damages
action
proceed
thus
special
factor
counselling
hesitation
factor
must
cause
hesitate
answering
question
affirmative
necessarily
judicial
function
establish
whole
categories
cases
federal
officers
must
defend
personal
liability
claims
complex
sphere
litigation
burdens
benefits
others
true
equitable
remedies
prove
insufficient
damages
remedy
might
necessary
redress
past
harm
deter
future
violations
yet
decision
recognize
damages
remedy
requires
assessment
impact
governmental
operations
systemwide
matters
include
burdens
government
employees
sued
personally
well
projected
costs
consequences
government
tort
monetary
liability
mechanisms
legal
system
used
bring
proper
formulation
implementation
public
policies
considerations
may
make
less
probable
congress
want
judiciary
entertain
damages
suit
given
case
sometimes
doubt
case
arises
context
congress
designed
regulatory
authority
guarded
way
making
less
likely
congress
want
judiciary
interfere
see
chappell
supra
military
stanley
supra
meyer
supra
public
purse
wilkie
supra
federal
land
sometimes
doubt
feature
case
difficult
predict
advance
causes
pause
acting
without
express
congressional
authorization
sum
sound
reasons
think
congress
might
doubt
efficacy
necessity
damages
remedy
part
system
enforcing
law
correcting
wrong
courts
must
refrain
creating
remedy
order
respect
role
congress
determining
nature
extent
jurisdiction
article
iii
related
way
alternative
remedial
structure
present
certain
case
alone
may
limit
power
judiciary
infer
new
bivens
cause
action
congress
created
alternative
existing
process
protecting
injured
party
interest
may
amoun
convincing
reason
judicial
branch
refrain
providing
new
freestanding
remedy
damages
wilkie
supra
see
also
bush
supra
recognizing
regulations
provided
alternative
means
relief
malesko
recognizing
state
tort
law
provided
alternative
means
relief
minneci
supra
iii
appropriate
turn
first
bivens
claims
challenging
conditions
confinement
imposed
respondents
pursuant
formal
policy
adopted
executive
officials
wake
september
attacks
refer
claims
detention
policy
claims
detention
policy
claims
allege
petitioners
violated
respondents
due
process
equal
protection
rights
holding
restrictive
conditions
confinement
claims
allege
wardens
violated
fourth
fifth
amendments
subjecting
respondents
frequent
strip
searches
term
detention
policy
claims
include
respondents
claim
alleging
warden
hasty
allowed
guards
abuse
detainees
claim
considered
separately
point
question
whether
considered
relevant
special
factors
whole
context
detention
policy
claims
extend
remedy
claims
allowing
respondents
detention
policy
claims
proceed
bivens
appeals
perform
special
factors
analysis
reason
said
special
factors
analysis
necessary
plaintiff
asks
bivens
remedy
new
context
appeals
view
context
new
determine
whether
bivens
context
novel
appeals
employed
test
first
asked
whether
asserted
constitutional
right
issue
previous
bivens
case
second
asked
whether
mechanism
injury
mechanism
injury
previous
bivens
case
appeals
approach
answer
questions
yes
context
new
special
factors
analysis
required
ibid
approach
inconsistent
analysis
malesko
decided
case
approved
bivens
action
eighth
amendment
federal
prison
officials
failure
provide
medical
treatment
see
carlson
malesko
plaintiff
sought
relief
private
prison
operator
almost
parallel
circumstances
cases
right
issue
eighth
amendment
right
free
cruel
unusual
punishment
cases
mechanism
injury
failure
provide
adequate
medical
treatment
thus
approach
followed
appeals
correct
one
held
cases
arose
context
obviating
need
special
factors
inquiry
however
controlling
analytic
framework
malesko
even
though
right
mechanism
injury
carlson
held
contexts
different
explained
special
factors
counseled
hesitation
bivens
remedy
therefore
unavailable
similar
reasons
holding
appeals
instant
suit
inconsistent
analytic
framework
chappell
davis
decided
cautionary
instructions
respect
bivens
suits
see
supra
held
claim
congressman
proceed
action
davis
chappell
however
cautionary
rules
applicable
result
similar
discrimination
suit
military
officers
allowed
proceed
chappell
framework
controls
appeals
erred
holding
suit
present
new
bivens
context
proper
test
determining
whether
case
presents
new
bivens
context
follows
case
different
meaningful
way
previous
bivens
cases
decided
context
new
without
endeavoring
create
exhaustive
list
differences
meaningful
enough
make
given
context
new
one
examples
might
prove
instructive
case
might
differ
meaningful
way
rank
officers
involved
constitutional
right
issue
generality
specificity
official
action
extent
judicial
guidance
officer
respond
problem
emergency
confronted
statutory
legal
mandate
officer
operating
risk
disruptive
intrusion
judiciary
functioning
branches
presence
potential
special
factors
previous
bivens
cases
consider
present
suit
respondents
detention
policy
claims
challenge
confinement
conditions
imposed
illegal
aliens
pursuant
executive
policy
created
wake
major
terrorist
attack
american
soil
claims
bear
little
resemblance
three
bivens
claims
approved
past
claim
fbi
agents
handcuffing
man
home
without
warrant
claim
congressman
firing
female
secretary
claim
prison
officials
failure
treat
inmate
asthma
see
bivens
davis
chappell
appeals
therefore
held
new
bivens
context
done
recognized
special
factors
analysis
required
allowing
damages
suit
proceed
considering
special
factors
necessarily
implicated
detention
policy
claims
holds
factors
show
whether
damages
action
allowed
decision
congress
make
courts
respect
claims
executive
officials
must
noted
bivens
action
proper
vehicle
altering
entity
policy
malesko
supra
furthermore
bivens
claim
brought
individual
official
acts
acts
others
purpose
bivens
deter
officer
meyer
bivens
designed
hold
officers
responsible
acts
subordinates
see
iqbal
government
officials
may
held
liable
unconstitutional
conduct
subordinates
theory
respondeat
superior
even
action
confined
conduct
particular
executive
officer
discrete
instance
claims
call
question
formulation
implementation
general
policy
turn
necessarily
require
inquiry
discovery
whole
course
discussions
deliberations
led
policies
governmental
acts
challenged
consequences
counsel
allowing
bivens
action
executive
officials
burden
demand
litigation
might
well
prevent
precise
future
officials
like
devoting
time
effort
required
proper
discharge
duties
see
cheney
dist
noting
paramount
necessity
protecting
executive
branch
vexatious
litigation
might
distract
energetic
performance
constitutional
duties
closely
related
problem
noted
discovery
litigation
process
either
border
upon
directly
implicate
discussion
deliberations
led
formation
policy
question
see
federal
open
market
comm
merrill
noting
disclosure
executive
branch
documents
inhibit
free
flow
advice
including
analysis
reports
expression
opinion
within
agency
allowing
damages
suit
context
like
context
circumstances
require
courts
interfere
intrusive
way
sensitive
functions
executive
branch
see
clinton
jones
recognizing
ven
branch
arrogate
power
doctrine
requires
branch
impair
another
performance
constitutional
quoting
loving
considerations
also
counsel
allowing
damages
claim
proceed
executive
officials
see
cheney
supra
noting
special
considerations
control
case
implicates
executive
branch
interests
maintaining
autonomy
office
safeguarding
confidentiality
communications
addition
special
factor
applies
claims
executive
officials
three
special
factors
apply
well
detention
policy
claims
petitioners
first
respondents
detention
policy
claims
challenge
standard
law
enforcement
operations
challenge
well
major
elements
government
whole
response
september
attacks
thus
necessity
requiring
inquiry
sensitive
issues
national
security
inquiry
allowed
private
suit
damages
bivens
action
assume
dimensions
far
greater
present
bivens
either
two
cases
indeed
putative
bivens
case
yet
come
policy
prerogative
congress
president
see
art
art
ii
judicial
inquiry
realm
raises
concerns
separation
powers
trenching
matters
committed
branches
christopher
harbury
concerns
even
pronounced
judicial
inquiry
comes
context
claim
seeking
money
damages
rather
claim
seeking
injunctive
equitable
relief
risk
personal
damages
liability
likely
cause
official
difficult
necessary
decisions
concerning
policy
reasons
courts
shown
deference
executive
branch
determined
national
security
winter
natural
resources
defense
council
indeed
courts
traditionally
reluctant
intrude
upon
authority
executive
military
national
security
affairs
unless
congress
specifically
provided
otherwise
department
navy
egan
congress
provided
otherwise
limitations
course
power
executive
article
ii
constitution
powers
authorized
congressional
enactments
even
respect
matters
national
security
see
hamdi
rumsfeld
plurality
opinion
whatever
power
constitution
envisions
executive
times
conflict
assuredly
envisions
role
three
branches
individual
liberties
stake
boumediene
bush
liberty
security
reconciled
system
reconciled
within
framework
law
concerns
must
become
talisman
used
ward
inconvenient
claims
label
used
cover
multitude
sins
mitchell
forsyth
even
heightened
given
difficulty
domestic
cases
ibid
quoting
dist
eastern
dist
even
question
whether
congressionally
uninvited
intrusion
inappropriate
action
judiciary
take
stanley
factors
discussed
suggest
congress
failure
provide
damages
remedy
might
mere
oversight
congressional
silence
might
inadvertent
schweiker
possibility
counsels
hesitation
absence
affirmative
action
congress
bivens
furthermore
inquiry
respecting
likely
probable
intent
congress
silence
congress
relevant
silence
telling
almost
years
since
september
federal
government
responses
terrorist
attack
well
documented
congressional
interest
frequent
intense
schweiker
supra
interest
directed
conditions
confinement
issue
indeed
congress
behest
department
justice
office
inspector
general
compiled
report
documenting
conditions
mdc
great
detail
see
opinion
raggi
noting
usa
patriot
act
required
department
inspector
general
review
report
congress
identified
abuses
civil
rights
civil
liberties
fighting
terrorism
nevertheless
point
congress
choose
extend
person
kind
remedies
respondents
seek
lawsuit
schweiker
silence
notable
likely
policies
attract
attention
congress
thus
congress
fails
provide
damages
remedy
circumstances
like
much
difficult
believe
congressional
inaction
inadvertent
central
importance
case
like
bivens
davis
damages
nothing
bivens
supra
harlan
concurring
judgment
davis
unlike
plaintiffs
cases
respondents
challenge
individual
instances
discrimination
law
enforcement
overreach
due
nature
difficult
address
except
way
damages
actions
fact
respondents
instead
challenge
policy
decisions
concerning
conditions
confinement
imposed
hundreds
prisoners
address
kinds
decisions
detainees
may
seek
injunctive
relief
addition
left
open
question
whether
might
able
challenge
confinement
conditions
via
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
see
bell
wolfish
leave
another
day
question
propriety
using
writ
habeas
corpus
obtain
review
conditions
confinement
preiser
rodriguez
prisoner
put
additional
unconstitutional
restraints
lawful
custody
arguable
habeas
corpus
lie
remove
restraints
making
custody
illegal
indeed
habeas
remedy
necessity
required
use
provided
faster
direct
route
relief
suit
money
damages
successful
habeas
petition
required
officials
place
respondents
conditions
immediately
yet
damages
suit
remains
unresolved
years
later
bell
preiser
need
determine
scope
availability
habeas
corpus
remedy
question
briefed
argued
sum
respondents
available
alternative
forms
judicial
relief
minneci
alternative
methods
relief
available
bivens
remedy
usually
see
bush
schweiker
supra
malesko
minneci
supra
persisting
concern
course
absent
bivens
remedy
insufficient
deterrence
prevent
officers
violating
constitution
circumstances
like
presented
however
stakes
sides
argument
far
higher
past
cases
considered
bivens
liability
imposed
high
officers
face
personal
liability
damages
might
refrain
taking
urgent
lawful
action
time
crisis
already
noted
costs
difficulties
later
litigation
might
intrude
upon
interfere
proper
exercise
office
side
balance
fact
executive
actions
sweeping
potential
affect
liberty
many
reason
consider
proper
means
impose
restraint
provide
redress
injury
therefore
balance
struck
situations
like
one
deterring
constitutional
violations
freeing
high
officials
make
lawful
decisions
necessary
protect
nation
times
great
peril
cf
stanley
supra
noting
analysis
case
turned
much
occasional
unintended
impairment
military
discipline
one
willing
tolerate
proper
balance
one
congress
judiciary
undertake
reasons
appeals
erred
allowing
respondents
detention
policy
claims
proceed
bivens
iv
one
respondents
claims
bivens
requires
different
analysis
prisoner
abuse
claim
mdc
warden
dennis
hasty
allegation
warden
hasty
violated
fifth
amendment
allowing
prison
guards
abuse
respondents
warden
argues
initial
matter
complaint
claim
relief
plausible
face
iqbal
quoting
bell
atlantic
twombly
applying
precedents
appeals
held
substantive
standard
sufficiency
claim
whether
warden
showed
deliberate
indifference
prisoner
abuse
parties
appear
agree
standard
purposes
case
assumes
correct
complaint
alleges
guards
routinely
abused
respondents
warden
encouraged
abuse
referring
respondents
terrorists
prevented
respondents
using
normal
grievance
procedures
stayed
away
unit
avoid
seeing
abuse
made
aware
abuse
via
inmate
complaints
staff
complaints
hunger
strikes
suicide
attempts
ignored
direct
evidence
abuse
including
logs
official
records
took
action
rectify
address
situation
abuse
resulted
injuries
described
see
supra
allegations
assumed
true
subject
proof
later
stage
plausibly
show
warden
deliberate
indifference
abuse
consistent
opinion
every
judge
case
considered
question
including
dissenters
appeals
concludes
prisoner
abuse
allegations
warden
hasty
state
plausible
ground
find
constitutional
violation
bivens
remedy
implied
warden
hasty
argues
however
bivens
extended
instance
alleged
prisoner
abuse
noted
first
question
must
ask
case
like
one
whether
claim
arises
new
bivens
context
whether
case
different
meaningful
way
previous
bivens
cases
decided
supra
true
case
significant
parallels
one
previous
bivens
cases
carlson
green
allow
bivens
claim
prisoner
mistreatment
specifically
failure
provide
medical
care
allegations
injury
compelling
issue
carlson
especially
true
given
complaint
alleges
serious
violations
bureau
prisons
policy
see
cfr
providing
prison
staff
may
use
force
last
alternative
reasonable
efforts
resolve
situation
failed
staff
may
use
amount
force
necessary
ensure
prison
safety
security
incidents
involving
use
force
must
carefully
documented
requiring
warden
investigate
certain
complaints
inmate
abuse
yet
even
modest
extension
still
extension
case
seek
extend
carlson
new
context
noted
case
present
new
context
bivens
purposes
implicates
different
constitutional
right
judicial
precedents
provide
less
meaningful
guide
official
conduct
potential
special
factors
considered
previous
bivens
cases
see
supra
constitutional
right
different
since
carlson
predicated
eighth
amendment
claim
predicated
fifth
see
judicial
guidance
available
warden
respect
supervisory
duties
less
developed
long
made
clear
standard
claims
alleging
failure
provide
medical
treatment
prisoner
deliberate
indifference
serious
medical
needs
estelle
gamble
standard
claim
alleging
warden
allowed
guards
abuse
detainees
less
clear
precedents
case
also
certain
features
considered
previous
bivens
cases
might
discourage
authorizing
bivens
remedy
noted
existence
alternative
remedies
usually
precludes
authorizing
bivens
action
supra
might
alternative
remedies
available
example
writ
habeas
corpus
wolfish
injunction
requiring
warden
bring
prison
compliance
regulations
discussed
form
equitable
relief
furthermore
legislative
action
suggesting
congress
want
damages
remedy
factor
counseling
hesitation
see
supra
years
carlson
decided
congress
passed
prison
litigation
reform
act
made
comprehensive
changes
way
prisoner
abuse
claims
must
brought
federal
see
seems
clear
congress
specific
occasion
consider
matter
prisoner
abuse
consider
proper
way
remedy
wrongs
said
dicta
act
exhaustion
provisions
apply
bivens
suits
see
porter
nussle
act
provide
standalone
damages
remedy
federal
jailers
argued
suggests
congress
chose
extend
carlson
damages
remedy
cases
involving
types
prisoner
mistreatment
differences
claim
one
carlson
perhaps
small
least
practical
terms
given
expressed
caution
extending
bivens
remedy
however
inquiry
easily
satisfied
differences
course
trivial
suffice
create
new
bivens
context
differences
identified
least
meaningful
ones
thus
allowing
claim
proceed
bivens
appeals
performed
special
factors
analysis
analyzed
whether
alternative
remedies
available
sound
reasons
think
congress
might
doubt
efficacy
necessity
damages
remedy
suit
like
one
supra
although
perform
analysis
first
instance
briefs
concentrated
almost
efforts
elsewhere
given
absence
comprehensive
presentation
parties
fact
appeals
conduct
analysis
declines
perform
special
factors
analysis
better
course
vacate
judgment
allowing
appeals
district
remand
one
issue
remains
addressed
claim
petitioners
subject
liability
civil
conspiracy
unlike
prisoner
abuse
claim
discussed
claim
implicates
activities
petitioners
executive
officials
well
wardens
creating
conditions
confinement
issue
prohibition
contained
enacted
significant
part
civil
rights
legislation
passed
aftermath
civil
war
see
carpenters
scott
detailing
legislative
history
griffin
breckenridge
great
american
fed
sav
loan
assn
novotny
powell
concurring
describing
civil
war
era
remedial
statute
statute
imposes
liability
two
persons
conspire
purpose
depriving
person
class
persons
equal
protection
laws
instant
suit
respondents
allege
petitioners
violated
statute
agreeing
implement
policy
respondents
detained
harsh
conditions
race
religion
ethnicity
national
origin
assuming
allegations
true
well
pleaded
question
whether
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
qualified
immunity
rule
seeks
proper
balance
two
competing
interests
one
hand
damages
suits
may
offer
realistic
avenue
vindication
constitutional
guarantees
harlow
fitzgerald
hand
permitting
damages
suits
government
officials
entail
substantial
social
costs
including
risk
fear
personal
monetary
liability
harassing
litigation
unduly
inhibit
officials
discharge
duties
anderson
creighton
one
means
accommodate
two
objectives
held
government
officials
entitled
qualified
immunity
respect
discretionary
functions
performed
official
capacities
ibid
doctrine
qualified
immunity
gives
officials
breathing
room
make
reasonable
mistaken
judgments
open
legal
questions
ashcroft
cases
provide
additional
instruction
define
implement
immunity
whether
qualified
immunity
invoked
turns
objective
legal
reasonableness
official
acts
harlow
supra
reasonableness
official
action
turn
must
assessed
light
legal
rules
clearly
established
time
action
taken
anderson
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
mitchell
requirement
official
loses
qualified
immunity
violating
clearly
established
law
protects
officials
accused
violating
extremely
abstract
rights
anderson
supra
fourth
amendment
provides
example
qualified
immunity
functions
respect
abstract
rights
plain
terms
amendment
forbids
unreasonable
searches
seizures
yet
may
difficult
officer
know
whether
search
seizure
deemed
reasonable
given
precise
situation
encountered
see
saucier
katz
sometimes
difficult
officer
determine
relevant
legal
doctrine
excessive
force
apply
factual
situation
officer
confronts
reason
dispositive
question
violative
nature
particular
conduct
clearly
established
mullenix
luna
per
curiam
slip
quoting
ashcroft
supra
necessary
course
action
question
previously
held
unlawful
anderson
supra
officer
might
lose
qualified
immunity
even
reported
case
directly
point
ashcroft
supra
light
law
unlawfulness
officer
conduct
must
apparent
anderson
supra
subject
officers
broader
liability
disrupt
balance
cases
strike
interests
vindication
citizens
constitutional
rights
public
officials
effective
performance
duties
davis
scherer
practical
legal
matter
difficult
officials
reasonably
anticipate
conduct
may
give
rise
liability
damages
ibid
light
concerns
held
qualified
immunity
protects
plainly
incompetent
knowingly
violate
law
malley
briggs
determine
whether
given
officer
falls
either
two
categories
must
ask
whether
clear
reasonable
officer
alleged
conduct
unlawful
situation
confronted
saucier
supra
defendant
officer
must
either
incompetent
else
knowing
violator
law
thus
entitled
qualified
immunity
however
reasonable
officer
might
known
certain
conduct
unlawful
officer
immune
liability
principles
must
concluded
reasonable
officials
petitioners
positions
known
predicted
prohibited
joint
consultations
resulting
policies
caused
injuries
alleged
least
two
aspects
complaint
indicate
petitioners
potential
liability
statutory
offense
known
anticipated
reasonable
officials
position
first
conspiracy
recited
complaint
alleged
among
officers
branch
government
executive
branch
department
department
justice
second
discussions
preface
outline
general
policy
fact
officers
department
analogous
principle
discussed
context
antitrust
law
instructive
precedent
indicates
unlawful
conspiracy
officers
within
single
corporate
entity
consult
among
adopt
policy
entity
see
copperweld
corp
independence
tube
principle
sometimes
called
doctrine
agreement
among
agents
legal
entity
agents
act
official
capacities
unlawful
conspiracy
ibid
rule
derived
nature
conspiracy
prohibition
conspiracy
requires
agreement
particular
agreement
unlawful
act
among
two
separate
persons
two
agents
legal
entity
make
agreement
course
official
duties
however
practical
legal
matter
acts
attributed
principal
follows
agreement
two
separate
people
see
analogizing
multiple
team
horses
drawing
vehicle
control
single
driver
sure
given
approval
doctrine
specific
context
see
great
american
division
courts
appeals
moreover
respecting
validity
correctness
doctrine
reference
conspiracies
see
hull
shuck
white
dissenting
denial
certiorari
discussing
circuit
split
bowie
maddox
cadc
detailing
longstanding
split
whether
doctrine
applies
civil
rights
conspiracies
nothing
opinion
interpreted
either
approving
disapproving
doctrine
application
context
alleged
violation
might
determine
later
case
different
considerations
apply
conspiracy
respecting
equal
protection
guarantees
distinct
conspiracy
antitrust
context
yet
fact
courts
divided
whether
conspiracy
arise
official
discussions
among
agents
entity
demonstrates
law
point
well
established
courts
divided
issue
central
cause
action
alleged
reasonable
official
lacks
notice
required
imposing
liability
see
wilson
layne
noting
unfair
subject
officers
damages
liability
even
judges
disagree
reichle
howards
addition
concern
agents
legal
entity
distinct
enough
conspire
one
another
sound
reasons
conclude
agreements
among
federal
officials
department
subject
private
cause
action
damages
state
claim
plaintiff
must
first
show
defendants
conspired
reached
agreement
one
another
see
carpenters
stating
elements
claim
include
conspiracy
thus
claim
federal
officials
necessity
implicates
substance
official
discussions
indicated
respect
claims
suit
open
discussion
among
federal
officers
encouraged
reach
consensus
policies
department
federal
government
pursue
see
supra
close
frequent
consultations
facilitate
adoption
implementation
policies
essential
orderly
conduct
governmental
affairs
discussions
resulting
policies
basis
private
suits
seeking
damages
officials
individuals
result
chill
interchange
discourse
necessary
adoption
implementation
governmental
policies
see
cheney
discussing
need
confidential
communications
among
executive
branch
officials
merrill
considerations
suggest
officials
employed
governmental
department
conspire
speak
one
another
work
together
official
capacities
whether
contention
prevail
need
decided
suffices
say
question
sufficiently
open
officials
suit
certain
applicable
discussions
actions
thus
law
respondents
seek
invoke
clearly
established
follows
reasonable
officers
petitioners
positions
known
certainty
alleged
agreements
forbidden
law
see
saucier
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
respect
claims
facts
alleged
complaint
true
happened
respondents
days
following
september
tragic
nothing
opinion
read
condone
treatment
contend
subjected
question
however
whether
petitioners
alleged
conduct
proper
whether
gave
decent
respect
respondents
dignity
whether
keeping
idea
rule
law
must
inspire
us
even
times
crisis
instead
question
respect
bivens
claims
whether
allow
action
money
damages
absence
congressional
authorization
reasons
given
answers
question
negative
detention
policy
claims
prisoner
abuse
claim
briefs
concentrated
issue
remands
allow
appeals
consider
claim
light
bivens
analysis
set
forth
question
respect
claim
whether
reasonable
officer
petitioners
position
known
alleged
conduct
unlawful
conspiracy
reasons
given
answers
question
negative
judgment
appeals
reversed
claims
except
prisoner
abuse
claim
warden
hasty
judgment
appeals
respect
claim
vacated
case
remanded
proceedings
ordered
justice
sotomayor
justice
kagan
justice
gorsuch
took
part
consideration
decision
cases
opinion
thomas
nos
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
thomas
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
join
opinion
except
part
write
separately
express
view
decision
remand
respondents
claims
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
concerns
qualified
immunity
precedents
respect
respondents
bivens
claims
join
opinion
extent
reverses
second
circuit
ruling
correctly
applies
precedents
hold
bivens
supply
cause
action
petitioners
alleged
fourth
fifth
amendment
violations
also
correctly
recognizes
respondents
claims
petitioner
dennis
hasty
seek
extend
bivens
new
context
see
ante
concur
judgment
vacating
appeals
judgment
regard
claims
hasty
ante
previously
noted
relic
heady
days
assumed
powers
create
causes
action
wilkie
robbins
concurring
opinion
quoting
correctional
services
malesko
scalia
concurring
thus
declined
extend
bivens
even
reasoning
logically
applied
thereby
limiting
bivens
progeny
precise
circumstances
involved
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
cases
mean
reversal
judgment
appeals
order
however
order
controlling
judgment
suit
concur
judgment
vacating
remanding
claims
petitioner
hasty
disposition
closest
preferred
approach
ii
respondents
claims
join
part
opinion
holds
respondents
entitled
qualified
immunity
correctly
applies
precedents
party
asked
us
reconsider
write
separately
however
note
growing
concern
qualified
immunity
jurisprudence
civil
rights
act
frequently
litigated
originally
part
established
causes
action
plaintiffs
seek
money
damages
government
officers
violated
federal
law
see
stat
although
act
made
mention
defenses
immunities
read
harmony
general
principles
tort
immunities
defenses
rather
derogation
malley
briggs
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
done
ertain
immunities
well
established
presume
congress
specifically
provided
wished
abolish
buckley
fitzsimmons
accord
briscoe
lahue
immunity
thus
available
statute
historically
accorded
relevant
official
analogous
situation
common
law
imbler
pachtman
unless
statute
provides
reason
think
congress
preserve
defense
see
tower
glover
contexts
conducted
inquiry
statute
requires
see
wyatt
cole
kennedy
concurring
example
concluded
legislators
judges
absolutely
immune
liability
official
acts
immunity
well
established
common
law
see
tenney
brandhove
legislators
pierson
ray
judges
similarly
looked
common
law
holding
prosecutor
immune
suits
relating
judicial
phase
criminal
process
imbler
supra
burns
reed
see
kalina
fletcher
scalia
joined
thomas
concurring
arguing
imbler
misunderstood
rules
although
suits
relating
prosecutor
advice
police
officers
burns
supra
developing
immunity
doctrine
executive
officers
also
started
applying
rules
pierson
held
police
officers
absolutely
immune
claim
arising
arrest
made
pursuant
unconstitutional
statute
common
law
never
granted
arresting
officers
sort
immunity
rather
concluded
police
officers
assert
defense
good
faith
probable
cause
claim
unconstitutional
arrest
defense
available
analogous
torts
false
arrest
imprisonment
common
law
elaborating
doctrine
qualified
immunity
executive
officials
however
diverged
historical
inquiry
mandated
statute
see
wyatt
supra
kennedy
concurring
accord
britton
scalia
joined
thomas
dissenting
decisions
following
pierson
completely
reformulated
qualified
immunity
along
principles
embodied
common
law
anderson
creighton
discussing
harlow
fitzgerald
instead
asking
whether
common
law
accorded
immunity
officer
tort
analogous
plaintiff
claim
instead
grant
immunity
officer
whose
conduct
violate
clearly
established
statutory
constitutional
rights
reasonable
person
known
mullenix
luna
per
riam
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
taylor
barkes
slip
government
official
liable
act
precedent
placed
statutory
constitutional
question
beyond
quoting
ashcroft
apply
clearly
established
standard
across
board
without
regard
precise
nature
various
officials
duties
precise
character
particular
rights
alleged
violated
anderson
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
attempted
locate
standard
common
law
existed
however
evidence
supports
conclusion
immunity
existed
looked
quite
different
current
doctrine
see
generally
baude
qualified
immunity
unlawful
cal
rev
forthcoming
manuscript
online
https
last
visited
june
analysis
longer
grounded
backdrop
congress
enacted
act
longer
engaged
interpret
ing
intent
congress
enacting
act
malley
supra
see
burns
supra
qualified
immunity
precedents
instead
represent
precisely
sort
freewheeling
policy
choice
previously
disclaimed
power
make
rehberg
paulk
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
tower
supra
license
establish
immunities
suits
brought
act
interests
judge
sound
public
policy
acknowledged
fact
clearly
established
standard
designed
protec
balance
vindication
constitutional
rights
government
officials
effective
performance
duties
reichle
howards
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
harlow
supra
explaining
recognition
qualified
immunity
defense
reflected
attempt
balance
competing
values
constitution
assigns
kind
balancing
congress
courts
today
decision
continue
path
precedents
marked
ask
whether
clear
reasonable
officer
alleged
conduct
unlawful
situation
confronted
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
rather
whether
officers
petitioners
positions
accorded
immunity
common
law
claims
analogous
respondents
even
ultimately
reach
conclusion
consistent
rules
prevailing
mere
fortuity
shift
focus
inquiry
whether
immunity
existed
common
law
continue
substitute
policy
preferences
mandates
congress
appropriate
case
reconsider
qualified
immunity
jurisprudence
breyer
dissenting
nos
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
et
al
writs
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
breyer
justice
ginsburg
joins
dissenting
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
held
fourth
amendment
provides
damages
remedy
federal
officials
injured
result
unconstitutional
search
seizure
davis
passman
held
fifth
amendment
provides
damages
remedy
individual
dismissed
employer
member
congress
basis
sex
violation
equal
protection
component
amendment
due
process
clause
carlson
green
held
eighth
amendment
provides
damages
remedy
prisoner
died
result
prison
official
deliberate
indifference
medical
needs
violation
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishment
well
established
federal
law
provides
damages
actions
least
similar
contexts
claims
constitutional
violation
arise
congress
ratified
bivens
actions
plaintiffs
frequently
bring
courts
accept
scholars
defend
importance
see
pfander
constitutional
torts
war
terror
canvassing
history
bivens
cataloguing
cases
moreover
courts
order
avoid
deterring
federal
officials
properly
performing
work
developed
safeguards
defendants
including
requirement
plaintiffs
plead
plausible
claims
ashcroft
iqbal
well
defense
qualified
immunity
frees
federal
officials
threat
liability
involvement
lawsuit
unless
plaintiffs
establish
officials
violated
established
constitutional
rights
quoting
harlow
fitzgerald
reluctant
extend
bivens
liability
new
context
new
category
defendants
iqbal
supra
quoting
correctional
services
malesko
made
clear
narrow
bivens
existing
scope
see
fdic
meyer
guarding
evisceration
bivens
remedy
deterrent
effects
lost
plaintiffs
us
today
seek
damages
unconstitutional
conditions
confinement
alleged
federal
officials
slammed
walls
shackled
exposed
nonstop
lighting
lack
hygiene
like
based
upon
invidious
discrimination
without
penological
justification
see
ante
view
claims
state
violations
clearly
established
law
fall
within
scope
longstanding
bivens
law
reasons
affirm
judgment
appeals
shall
discuss
length
believe
important
point
disagreement
view
wrong
hold
permitting
constitutional
tort
action
extend
bivens
applying
new
context
contrary
fear
holding
significantly
shrink
existing
bivens
contexts
diminishing
compensatory
remedy
constitutional
tort
law
offers
harmed
individuals
shall
explain
believe
suit
falls
well
within
scope
traditional
constitutional
tort
law
agree
arguments
contrary
recognize
write
separately
strongest
arguments
namely
fact
plaintiffs
claims
concern
detention
took
place
soon
serious
attack
concern
actions
government
officials
facts
may
affect
substantive
constitutional
questions
conditions
legitimate
scope
defense
extinguish
bivens
action
may
paraphrase
justice
harlan
concurring
bivens
wartime
well
peacetime
important
civilized
society
judicial
branch
nation
government
stand
ready
afford
remedy
flagrant
patently
unjustified
unconstitutional
abuses
official
power
opinion
concurring
judgment
cf
boumediene
bush
majority
opinion
well
summarizes
particular
claims
plaintiffs
make
suit
concern
conditions
confinement
began
soon
september
attacks
lasted
days
weeks
stretching
months
ante
point
plaintiffs
allege
defendants
knew
nothing
september
attacks
continued
detain
anyway
harsh
conditions
official
government
policy
defendants
became
aware
plaintiffs
innocence
led
plaintiffs
held
tiny
cells
hours
day
lights
continuously
left
shackled
moved
often
strip
searched
denied
access
forms
communication
outside
world
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
defendants
detained
plaintiffs
conditions
basis
race
religion
without
justification
moreover
prison
wardens
aware
deliberately
indifferent
certain
unofficial
activities
prison
guards
involving
pattern
physical
verbal
abuse
slam
ming
detainees
walls
twist
ing
arms
wrists
fingers
breaking
bones
subjecting
verbal
taunts
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
plaintiffs
complaint
alleges
defendants
department
justice
officials
prison
wardens
alike
directly
responsible
official
confinement
policy
aspects
mentioned
violated
due
process
equal
protection
components
fifth
amendment
complaint
adds
insofar
prison
wardens
deliberately
indifferent
unofficial
conduct
guards
violated
fourth
fifth
amendments
hold
complaint
properly
alleges
constitutional
torts
bivens
actions
damages
holdings
bivens
carlson
davis
rest
upon
four
basic
legal
considerations
first
bivens
referred
longstanding
precedent
stating
suggesting
constitution
provides
federal
courts
considerable
legal
authority
use
traditional
remedies
right
constitutional
wrongs
precedent
begins
marbury
madison
cranch
effectively
placed
upon
deny
existence
effective
legal
remedy
burden
showing
case
special
chief
justice
john
marshall
wrote
essence
civil
liberty
lies
right
every
individual
claim
protection
laws
whenever
receives
injury
chief
justice
referred
blackstone
commentaries
stating
general
indisputable
rule
legal
right
also
legal
remedy
settled
invariable
principle
laws
england
every
right
withheld
must
remedy
every
injury
proper
redress
cranch
chief
justice
wrote
government
emphatically
termed
government
laws
men
deserve
high
appellation
laws
furnish
remedy
violation
vested
legal
right
ibid
concluded
must
something
peculiar
special
case
warrants
exclu
ding
injured
party
legal
redress
placing
within
class
cases
come
description
damnum
absque
injuria
loss
without
injury
cf
placing
political
questions
latter
special
category
much
later
bell
hood
wrote
federally
protected
rights
invaded
rule
beginning
courts
alert
adjust
remedies
grant
necessary
relief
see
also
bivens
citing
opinions
justices
cardozo
holmes
similar
effect
bivens
reiterated
principles
confirmed
appropriate
remedial
adjust
ment
case
award
money
damages
remedial
mechanism
normally
available
federal
courts
justice
harlan
agreed
adding
since
congress
general
statutory
grant
jurisdiction
authorized
courts
grant
equitable
relief
cases
arising
federal
jurisdiction
courts
likewise
authority
award
damages
traditional
remedy
law
order
vindicate
interests
individual
protected
bill
rights
opinion
concurring
judgment
second
cases
recognized
congress
silence
subject
indicates
willingness
leave
matter
courts
bivens
noted
argument
favoring
conclusion
absence
explicit
congressional
declaration
persons
injured
federal
officer
violation
fourth
amendment
may
recover
money
damages
agents
similarly
davis
passman
stressed
evidence
congress
meant
foreclose
damages
remedy
carlson
went
observing
sign
congress
meant
bivens
remedy
also
clear
evidence
congress
intended
preserve
third
bivens
cases
acknowledge
constitutional
tort
may
lie
special
factors
counse
hesitation
congress
provided
adequate
alternative
remedy
relevant
special
factors
cases
included
whether
faced
question
fiscal
policy
bivens
supra
risk
deluging
federal
courts
claims
davis
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
carlson
acknowledged
additional
factor
damages
suits
might
inhibit
federal
officials
efforts
perform
official
duties
concluded
qualified
immunity
accorded
federal
officials
existing
law
provides
adequate
protection
fourth
recognized
later
carlson
bivens
remedy
needed
cure
without
amount
constitutional
anomaly
long
incorporated
many
bill
rights
guarantees
see
amar
bill
rights
fourteenth
amendment
yale
federal
civil
rights
statutes
afforded
damages
remedy
person
state
official
deprived
federal
constitutional
right
see
monroe
pape
describing
history
federal
statutory
law
provide
damages
remedy
person
federal
official
deprived
right
even
though
bill
rights
time
founding
primarily
aimed
constraining
federal
government
thus
person
harmed
unconstitutional
search
seizure
might
sue
city
mayor
state
legislator
even
governor
person
sue
federal
agent
national
legislator
justice
department
official
identical
offense
design
wrote
stood
head
federal
officials
face
least
liability
state
officials
guilty
constitutional
transgression
carlson
supra
quoting
butz
economou
bivens
also
recognized
previously
inferred
damages
remedies
caused
violations
certain
federal
statutes
explicitly
authorize
damages
remedies
time
bivens
davis
carlson
treat
courts
power
derive
damages
remedy
constitutional
provision
included
within
power
find
damages
remedy
flowing
statutory
cases
fortiori
majority
opinion
points
recent
years
indicated
expanding
bivens
remedy
judicial
activity
ante
quoting
iqbal
emphasis
added
thus
held
remedy
available
context
suits
military
officers
see
chappell
wallace
stanley
context
suits
privately
operated
prisons
employees
see
minneci
pollard
malesko
context
suits
seeking
vindicate
procedural
rather
substantive
constitutional
protections
see
schweiker
chilicky
context
suits
seeking
vindicate
two
quite
different
forms
important
substantive
protection
one
involving
free
speech
see
bush
lucas
involving
protection
land
rights
see
wilkie
robbins
cases
involved
context
differed
bivens
davis
carlson
respect
kind
defendant
basic
nature
right
kind
harm
suffered
say
explicitly
stated
cases
fundamentally
different
anything
recognized
bivens
subsequent
cases
malesko
supra
emphasis
added
plaintiffs
asking
new
kind
federal
litigation
wilkie
supra
emphasis
added
thus
majority
opinion
says
repeatedly
wrote
expanding
scope
bivens
remedy
ante
nowhere
suggested
narrow
bivens
existing
scope
fact
diminish
ambiguity
holdings
set
framework
determining
whether
claim
constitutional
violation
calls
bivens
remedy
see
wilkie
supra
step
one
must
determine
whether
case
arises
new
context
whether
involves
new
category
defendants
malesko
supra
presumably
significantly
different
kind
constitutional
harm
purely
procedural
harm
harm
speech
harm
caused
physical
property
context
new
proceeds
step
two
asks
whether
alternative
existing
process
protecting
interest
amounts
convincing
reason
judicial
branch
refrain
providing
new
freestanding
remedy
damages
wilkie
none
proceeds
step
three
asks
whether
special
factors
counselling
hesitation
authorizing
new
kind
federal
litigation
ibid
precedent
makes
framework
applicable
apply
get
past
step
one
suit
seems
arises
context
similar
previously
permitted
bivens
actions
context
new
wilkie
supra
fundamentally
different
previous
bivens
cases
malesko
supra
first
plaintiffs
civilians
members
military
citizens
constitution
protects
noncitizens
serious
mistreatment
protects
citizens
see
liens
receive
constitutional
protections
come
within
territory
developed
substantial
connections
country
plaintiffs
may
illegally
present
fact
justify
physical
mistreatment
anyone
claim
fact
deprives
bivens
right
available
persons
citizens
noncitizens
alike
second
defendants
government
officials
members
military
private
persons
two
prison
wardens
three
others
department
justice
officials
prison
wardens
defendants
bivens
actions
government
officials
one
defendants
carlson
director
bureau
prisons
defendant
davis
member
congress
also
held
attorney
general
entitled
absolute
immunity
damages
suit
arising
actions
related
national
security
see
mitchell
forsyth
third
bivens
perspective
injuries
plaintiffs
claim
suffered
familiar
ones
focus
upon
conditions
confinement
plaintiffs
say
unnecessarily
shackled
confined
small
unhygienic
cells
subjected
continuous
lighting
presumably
preventing
sleep
unnecessarily
frequently
strip
searched
slammed
walls
injured
physically
subject
verbal
abuse
allege
suffered
harms
race
religion
defendants
either
turned
blind
eye
happening
introduced
policies
knew
lead
harms
even
though
defendants
knew
plaintiffs
connections
terrorism
claimed
harms
similar
even
worse
harms
plaintiffs
suffered
bivens
unreasonable
search
seizure
violation
fourth
amendment
davis
unlawful
discrimination
violation
fifth
amendment
carlson
deliberate
indifference
medical
need
violation
eighth
amendment
indeed
said
federal
prisoner
bureau
prisons
facility
alleges
constitutional
deprivation
may
bring
bivens
claim
offending
individual
officer
subject
defense
qualified
immunity
malesko
see
also
farmer
brennan
bivens
case
prisoner
abuse
claims
suit
seem
fill
bivens
bill
see
sell
scalia
dissenting
bivens
action
available
federal
pretrial
detainees
challenging
conditions
confinement
true
plaintiffs
bring
deliberate
indifference
claim
warden
hasty
fifth
amendment
due
process
clause
eighth
amendment
cruel
unusual
punishment
clause
carlson
latter
applies
convicted
criminals
former
applies
pretrial
immigration
detainees
harm
held
fifth
eighth
amendments
give
rise
bivens
remedies
difference
constitutional
scope
consists
circumstance
absence
conviction
makes
violation
worse
maintained
difference
use
two
amendments
fundamental
see
city
revere
massachusetts
hospital
due
process
rights
unconvicted
person
least
great
eighth
amendment
protections
available
convicted
prisoner
kingsley
hendrickson
slip
pretrial
detainees
unlike
convicted
prisoners
punished
zadvydas
davis
kennedy
dissenting
detention
incident
removal
justified
punishment
confinement
conditions
designed
order
punish
see
also
bistrian
levi
permitting
bivens
action
brought
detainee
administrative
segregation
thomas
ashcroft
detainee
alleging
failure
provide
adequate
medical
care
magluta
samples
detainee
solitary
confinement
papa
due
process
claims
arising
death
immigration
detainee
loe
armistead
detainee
claim
deliberate
indifference
medical
need
arrestee
bring
claim
excessive
force
bivens
convicted
prisoner
bring
claim
denying
medical
care
carlson
someone
neither
charged
convicted
crime
also
able
challenge
abuse
causes
need
medical
care
congress
suggested
wants
withdraw
damages
remedy
circumstances
like
express
terms
prison
litigation
reform
act
plra
apply
immigration
detainees
see
term
means
person
incarcerated
detained
facility
accused
convicted
sentenced
adjudicated
delinquent
violations
criminal
law
see
also
agyeman
ins
hold
alien
detained
ins
pending
deportation
within
meaning
plra
lafontant
ins
cadc
ojo
ins
fact
strong
evidence
congress
assumed
bivens
remedies
available
prisoners
enacted
plra
congress
continued
permit
prisoners
recover
physical
injuries
typical
kinds
bivens
injuries
see
pfander
constitutional
torts
lingering
doubt
claim
warden
hasty
arises
familiar
bivens
context
made
clear
claims
claims
subject
substantive
standard
see
hudson
mcmillian
wilson
seiter
extended
deliberate
indifference
standard
applied
eighth
amendment
claims
involving
medical
care
claims
conditions
confinement
indeed
made
point
bivens
case
alleging
prison
wardens
deliberately
indifferent
inmate
safety
see
farmer
supra
recognize
finds
significant
difference
fact
confinement
arose
soon
emergency
namely
september
attacks
short
answer
argument
respect
least
claimed
harms
plaintiffs
continued
suffer
harms
eight
months
september
attacks
took
place
defendants
knew
plaintiffs
connection
terrorism
see
app
pet
cert
believe
argument
strongest
consider
greater
length
see
part
infra
context
new
allow
plaintiffs
constitutional
claims
proceed
plaintiffs
adequately
alleged
defendants
personally
involved
imposing
conditions
confinement
knowledge
plaintiffs
bore
ties
terrorism
thus
satisfying
iqbal
pleading
standard
see
claims
must
plausible
see
also
breyer
dissenting
clearly
established
unconstitutional
subject
detainees
punitive
conditions
confinement
target
based
solely
race
religion
national
origin
defendants
entitled
qualified
immunity
constitutional
claims
see
bell
wolfish
davis
equally
clear
fifth
amendment
confers
petitioner
constitutional
right
free
illegal
discrimination
similarly
affirm
judgment
appeals
respect
plaintiffs
statutory
claim
namely
defendants
conspired
deprive
plaintiffs
equal
protection
laws
violation
see
turkmen
hasty
agree
appeals
defendants
entitled
qualified
immunity
claim
see
ibid
even
wrong
context
fundamentally
different
malesko
plaintiffs
claims
nonetheless
survive
step
two
step
three
framework
determining
whether
bivens
applies
see
supra
step
two
consists
asking
whether
alternative
existing
process
protecting
interest
amounts
convincing
reason
judicial
branch
refrain
providing
new
freestanding
remedy
damages
wilkie
find
alternative
existing
process
claim
plra
provides
plaintiffs
remedy
ante
rather
says
plaintiffs
may
available
relief
form
prospective
injunction
application
writ
habeas
corpus
ante
neither
prospective
injunction
writ
habeas
corpus
however
normally
provide
plaintiffs
redress
harms
already
suffered
plaintiffs
make
strong
claim
neither
available
least
considerable
time
plaintiffs
allege
two
three
months
subject
communications
blackout
prison
staff
permit
visitors
legal
social
telephone
calls
mail
families
attorneys
know
held
receive
visits
attorneys
subsequently
lawyers
call
week
defendants
interfered
detainees
effective
access
legal
counsel
office
inspector
general
oig
report
app
see
app
pet
cert
incorporating
oig
report
complaint
claims
make
virtually
impossible
say
elaborate
comprehensive
alternative
remedial
scheme
similar
schemes
past
found
block
application
bivens
new
contexts
bush
allegations
proved
suit
damages
nothing
bivens
harlan
concurring
judgment
alternative
existing
process
provides
convincing
reason
applying
bivens
must
proceed
step
three
wilkie
supra
find
special
factors
counse
hesitation
authorizing
bivens
action
turn
matter
next
ii
describes
two
general
considerations
believes
argue
extension
bivens
first
majority
opinion
points
far
less
likely
time
decided
bivens
imply
cause
action
damages
statute
explicitly
provide
damages
claim
see
ante
second
finds
silence
congress
notable
congress
though
likely
aware
policies
involved
suit
choose
extend
person
kind
remedies
plaintiffs
seek
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
doubt
strength
two
general
considerations
first
consideration
view
relevant
concede
majority
concurring
opinions
bivens
looked
part
support
fact
implied
damages
remedies
statutes
silent
subject
see
harlan
concurring
judgment
main
argument
favoring
conclusion
rather
drew
far
stronger
support
need
remedy
measured
constitutional
history
allowing
traditional
legal
remedies
necessary
believed
remedy
necessary
make
effective
constitution
protection
certain
basic
individual
rights
see
opinion
harlan
similarly
later
explained
damages
remedy
federal
officials
prevented
serious
legal
anomaly
previously
mentioned
existence
made
basic
constitutional
protections
individual
federal
government
abuse
bill
rights
war
objective
effective
protections
abuse
state
officials
war
post
objective
see
supra
second
circumstance
congressional
silence
relevant
manner
majority
opinion
describes
initially
saw
silence
indicating
absence
congressional
hostility
exercise
traditional
powers
see
bivens
supra
davis
congress
subsequent
silence
contains
strong
signs
accepted
bivens
actions
part
law
congress
rejected
proposal
eliminated
bivens
substituting
government
defendant
suits
federal
officers
raised
constitutional
claims
see
pfander
constitutional
torts
later
congress
expressly
immunized
federal
employees
acting
course
official
duties
tort
claims
except
premised
violations
constitution
see
federal
employees
liability
reform
tort
compensation
act
commonly
known
westfall
act
stated
consequently
crystal
clear
congress
views
federal
tort
claims
act
bivens
providing
parallel
complementary
causes
action
carlson
see
malesko
similar
congress
even
assumed
existence
bivens
remedy
suits
brought
noncitizen
detainees
suspected
terrorism
see
granting
qualified
immunity
absolute
immunity
military
civilian
federal
officials
sued
alien
detainees
suspected
terrorism
majority
opinion
also
sets
forth
specific
list
factors
says
bear
whether
case
presents
new
bivens
context
ante
view
case
might
differ
bivens
meaningful
way
rank
officers
involved
constitutional
right
issue
generality
specificity
individual
action
extent
judicial
guidance
officer
respond
problem
emergency
confronted
statutory
legal
mandate
officer
operating
risk
disruptive
intrusion
judiciary
functioning
branches
presence
potential
special
factors
previous
bivens
cases
consider
ante
view
factors
make
meaningful
difference
step
one
bivens
framework
better
cast
special
factors
relevant
step
three
see
none
normally
foreclose
bivens
action
none
determinative
consider
one
one
rank
officers
understand
officer
rank
might
bear
whether
violated
constitution
example
plaintiff
might
need
show
officer
willfully
blind
harm
caused
lower
ranking
officers
officer
actual
knowledge
misconduct
understand
rank
might
relate
existence
legal
defense
qualified
even
absolute
immunity
recognize
often
big
plaintiff
proves
clear
constitutional
violation
say
fourth
amendment
shows
defendant
possess
form
immunity
defense
damages
remedy
harm
suffered
rank
question
namely
bivens
question
law
treat
differently
official
local
constable
similarly
violated
constitution
neither
successfully
assert
immunity
defense
constitutional
right
issue
agree
factor
make
difference
substance
right
distinct
see
wilkie
land
rights
reasons
already
pointed
relevant
difference
rights
issue
rights
issue
previous
bivens
cases
namely
rights
free
unreasonable
searches
invidious
discrimination
physical
abuse
federal
custody
see
supra
generality
specificity
individual
action
think
generality
specificity
official
action
rather
nature
official
action
matters
bivens
apply
generally
applicable
actions
actions
taken
deliberately
jail
large
group
people
apply
highly
specific
actions
depending
upon
nature
actions
extent
judicial
guidance
factor
may
relevant
existence
constitutional
violation
defense
judicial
guidance
lacking
likely
constitutional
violation
clearly
established
see
anderson
creighton
officials
protected
qualified
immunity
unless
contours
right
sufficiently
clear
reasonable
official
understand
violates
right
see
assuming
violation
clear
presence
absence
judicial
guidance
relevant
existence
damages
remedy
statutory
legal
mandate
officer
operating
factor
may
prove
relevant
question
whether
constitutional
violation
exists
clearly
established
assuming
understand
factor
relevant
existence
damages
remedy
see
stanley
question
immunity
analytically
distinct
question
whether
bivens
action
lie
risk
disruptive
judicial
intrusion
damages
actions
risk
disrupting
degree
future
decisionmaking
members
executive
legislative
branches
authorized
bivens
actions
found
disruption
tolerable
explained
disruption
constitutional
perspective
desirable
see
davis
unless
constitutional
rights
become
merely
precatory
litigants
allege
constitutional
rights
violated
time
effective
means
judiciary
enforce
rights
must
able
invoke
existing
jurisdiction
courts
protection
malesko
supra
purpose
bivens
deter
individual
federal
officers
committing
constitutional
violations
insofar
means
consideration
provide
reason
bivens
action
government
employee
acts
time
security
need
shall
discuss
matter
next
part
potential
special
factors
since
certain
potential
factors
since
specify
nature
consider
differentiating
suit
previous
bivens
cases
militating
recognizing
bivens
action
view
strongest
argument
bivens
apply
actions
taken
times
need
example
war
emergency
correctly
points
constitution
grants
primary
power
protect
nation
security
executive
legislative
branches
judiciary
constitution
also
delegates
judiciary
duty
protect
individual
fundamental
constitutional
rights
hence
protection
rights
determination
security
needs
conflict
role
play
recently
made
clear
cases
arising
detention
enemy
combatants
guantanamo
bay
justice
wrote
state
war
blank
check
hamdi
rumsfeld
plurality
opinion
boumediene
reinforced
point
holding
noncitizens
detained
enemy
combatants
entitled
challenge
detention
writ
habeas
corpus
notwithstanding
concerns
stake
however
answered
specific
question
places
issue
bivens
actions
continue
exist
respect
actions
taken
time
war
national
emergency
view
one
thing
bivens
action
comes
accompanied
many
legal
safeguards
designed
prevent
courts
interfering
executive
legislative
branch
activity
reasonably
believed
necessary
protect
national
security
justice
jackson
words
constitution
suicide
pact
terminiello
chicago
dissenting
opinion
constitution
takes
account
public
necessity
thus
example
fourth
amendment
forbid
government
searches
seizures
forbids
unreasonable
ordinarily
requires
police
officer
obtain
search
warrant
entering
apartment
officer
observe
woman
dragged
apartment
act
fourth
amendment
makes
allowances
exigent
circumstances
brigham
city
stuart
warrantless
entry
justified
forestall
imminent
injury
similarly
fifth
amendment
bars
conditions
confinement
reasonably
related
legitimate
governmental
objective
bell
wolfish
unreasonable
illegitimate
time
peace
may
reasonable
legitimate
time
war
moreover
bivens
comes
accompanied
defense
federal
officials
face
suit
violated
constitutional
right
clearly
established
time
acted
harlow
order
prevent
presence
bivens
lawsuit
interfering
work
government
official
held
complaint
must
state
claim
relief
plausible
iqbal
onclusory
statements
hreadbare
allegations
suffice
protected
officials
particular
requiring
plaintiffs
plead
official
personally
involved
unconstitutional
conduct
official
vicariously
liable
another
misdeeds
finally
claim
filed
courts
tailor
discovery
orders
unnecessarily
improperly
interfere
official
work
second
circuit
emphasized
need
vindicate
purpose
qualified
immunity
defense
dismissing
claims
public
officials
early
stage
litigation
iqbal
hasty
defendants
current
former
senior
officials
government
allegations
knowledge
personal
involvement
easily
made
district
may
exercise
discretion
way
protects
substance
qualified
immunity
defense
officials
subjected
unnecessary
burdensome
discovery
trial
proceedings
make
discovery
subject
prior
approval
structure
limited
discovery
examining
written
responses
interrogatories
requests
admit
authorizing
depositions
deferring
discovery
directed
officials
discovery
officials
completed
demonstrated
need
discovery
higher
ranks
ibid
word
trial
structure
proceedings
full
recognition
qualified
immunity
amounts
immunity
suit
well
immunity
liability
given
safeguards
undue
interference
judiciary
times
war
emergency
abolition
limitation
bivens
actions
goes
far
cold
put
sweater
perhaps
overcoat
perhaps
also
turn
heat
set
fire
house
time
may
well
particular
need
bivens
remedies
government
actions
issue
history
tells
us
far
many
instances
executive
legislative
branch
took
actions
time
war
later
examination
turned
unnecessarily
unreasonably
deprived
american
citizens
basic
constitutional
rights
read
alien
sedition
acts
thousands
civilians
imprisoned
civil
war
suppression
civil
liberties
world
war
see
rehnquist
laws
one
civil
liberties
wartime
see
also
ex
parte
milligan
wall
decided
civil
war
pages
reports
recite
refusal
set
aside
government
world
war
ii
action
removing
american
citizens
japanese
origin
west
coast
homes
interning
camps
see
korematsu
action
least
officials
knew
time
unnecessary
see
murphy
dissenting
irons
justice
war
president
franklin
roosevelt
attorney
general
perhaps
exaggerating
said
constitution
greatly
bothered
wartime
president
rehnquist
supra
respect
actions
taken
periods
rely
exclusively
seems
suggest
upon
injunctive
remedies
writs
habeas
corpus
retail
equivalent
complaints
seeking
kind
relief
typically
come
emergency
emotions
strong
courts
may
little
inaccurate
information
courts
may
well
prove
particularly
reluctant
interfere
even
least
executive
branch
activity
reluctance
may
set
unfortunate
precedent
justice
jackson
pointed
li
like
loaded
weapon
awaiting
discharge
another
case
korematsu
supra
dissenting
opinion
damages
action
however
typically
brought
emergency
emotions
cooled
time
factual
information
available
circumstances
courts
time
exercise
judicial
virtues
calm
reflection
dispassionate
application
law
facts
applied
constitution
actions
taken
periods
war
emergency
see
boumediene
hamdi
rumsfeld
cf
youngstown
sheet
tube
sawyer
think
wisdom
permitting
courts
consider
bivens
actions
later
granting
monetary
compensation
wronged
time
follow
fortiori
well
known
lord
atkins
british
judge
wrote
midst
world
war
ii
amid
clash
arms
laws
silent
may
changed
speak
language
war
peace
liversidge
anderson
view
say
bivens
action
respect
dissent
footnotes
together
ashcroft
former
attorney
general
et
al
abbasi
et
hasty
et
al
abbasi
et
also
certiorari
footnotes
although
first
formulated
clearly
established
standard
bivens
cases
like
harlow
anderson
imported
standard
directly
act
cases
see
pearson
callahan
applying
clearly
established
standard
claim