correctional
services
malesko
argued
october
decided
november
petitioner
correctional
services
corporation
csc
contract
federal
bureau
prisons
bop
operates
le
marquis
community
correctional
center
le
marquis
facility
houses
federal
inmates
respondent
federal
inmate
afflicted
heart
condition
limiting
ability
climb
stairs
assigned
bedroom
le
marquis
fifth
floor
csc
instituted
policy
requiring
inmates
residing
sixth
floor
use
stairs
rather
elevator
respondent
exempted
policy
csc
employee
forbade
respondent
use
elevator
reach
bedroom
climbed
stairs
suffered
heart
attack
fell
subsequently
respondent
filed
damages
action
csc
individual
defendants
alleging
inter
alia
negligent
refusing
use
elevator
district
treated
complaint
raising
claims
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
recognized
first
time
implied
private
action
damages
federal
officers
alleged
violated
citizen
constitutional
rights
dismissing
suit
district
relied
fdic
meyer
reasoning
inter
alia
bivens
action
may
maintained
individual
corporate
entity
second
circuit
reversed
pertinent
part
remanded
remarking
respect
csc
meyer
expressly
declined
expand
category
defendants
actions
may
brought
include
federal
agents
also
federal
agencies
reasoned
private
entities
held
liable
bivens
accomplish
important
bivens
goal
providing
remedy
constitutional
violations
held
bivens
limited
holding
may
extended
confer
right
action
damages
private
entities
acting
color
federal
law
authority
imply
new
constitutional
tort
expressly
authorized
statute
anchored
general
jurisdiction
decide
cases
arising
federal
law
first
exercised
authority
bivens
discussion
subsequent
cases
clear
respondent
claim
fundamentally
different
anything
heretofore
recognized
years
bivens
jurisprudence
extended
holding
twice
provide
otherwise
nonexistent
cause
action
individual
officers
alleged
acted
unconstitutionally
carlson
green
provide
cause
action
plaintiff
lacked
alternative
remedy
harms
caused
individual
officer
unconstitutional
conduct
davis
passman
circumstances
present
consistently
rejected
invitations
extend
bivens
often
reasons
foreclose
extension
see
bush
lucas
bivens
purpose
deter
individual
federal
officers
agency
committing
constitutional
violations
meyer
made
clear
inter
alia
threat
suit
individual
employer
kind
deterrence
contemplated
bivens
case
every
meaningful
sense
corporate
defendant
available
suit
claimants
focus
collection
efforts
individual
directly
responsible
alleged
injury
meyer
logic
inferring
constitutional
tort
remedy
private
entity
like
csc
therefore
foreclosed
respondent
claim
requiring
private
corporations
acting
color
federal
law
pay
constitutional
harms
commit
best
way
discourage
future
harms
relevance
bivens
concerned
solely
deterring
individual
officers
unconstitutional
acts
reason
consider
extending
bivens
beyond
core
premise
begin
federal
prisoners
enjoy
respondent
contemplated
remedy
prisoner
bop
facility
alleges
constitutional
deprivation
remedy
lies
offending
individual
officer
whether
makes
sense
impose
asymmetrical
liability
costs
private
prison
facilities
alone
question
congress
decide
situation
claimants
respondent
shoes
lack
effective
remedies
conceded
oral
argument
alternative
remedies
least
great
many
respects
greater
anything
bivens
example
federal
prisoners
private
facilities
enjoy
parallel
tort
remedy
unavailable
prisoners
housed
government
facilities
inmates
respondent
position
also
full
access
remedial
mechanisms
established
bop
including
suits
federal
injunctive
relief
long
recognized
proper
means
preventing
entities
acting
unconstitutionally
grievances
filed
bop
administrative
remedy
program
pp
reversed
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
scalia
kennedy
thomas
joined
scalia
filed
concurring
opinion
thomas
joined
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
correctional
services
corporation
petitioner
john
malesko
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
november
chief
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
decide
whether
implied
damages
action
first
recognized
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
extended
allow
recovery
private
corporation
operating
halfway
house
contract
bureau
prisons
decline
extend
bivens
petitioner
correctional
services
corporation
csc
contract
federal
bureau
prisons
bop
operates
community
corrections
centers
facilities
house
federal
prisoners
since
late
csc
operated
le
marquis
community
correctional
center
le
marquis
halfway
house
located
new
york
city
respondent
john
malesko
former
federal
inmate
convicted
federal
securities
fraud
december
sentenced
term
months
imprisonment
supervision
bop
imprisonment
respondent
diagnosed
heart
condition
treated
prescription
medication
respondent
condition
limited
ability
engage
physical
activity
climbing
stairs
february
bop
transferred
respondent
le
marquis
serve
remainder
sentence
respondent
assigned
living
quarters
fifth
floor
march
petitioner
instituted
policy
le
marquis
requiring
inmates
residing
sixth
floor
use
staircase
rather
elevator
travel
lobby
rooms
dispute
respondent
exempted
policy
account
heart
condition
respondent
alleges
march
however
jorge
urena
employee
petitioner
forbade
use
elevator
reach
bedroom
respondent
protested
specially
permitted
elevator
access
urena
adamant
respondent
climbed
stairs
suffered
heart
attack
fell
injuring
left
ear
three
years
incident
occurred
respondent
filed
pro
se
action
csc
unnamed
csc
employees
district
southern
district
new
york
two
years
later
acting
counsel
respondent
filed
amended
complaint
named
urena
john
doe
defendants
amended
complaint
alleged
csc
urena
unnamed
defendants
negligent
failing
obtain
requisite
medication
respondent
condition
negligent
refusing
respondent
use
elevator
app
alleged
respondent
injured
left
ear
aggravated
condition
result
negligence
defendants
ibid
respondent
demanded
judgment
sum
million
compensatory
damages
million
anticipated
future
damages
punitive
damages
sum
ury
may
determine
district
treated
amended
complaint
raising
claims
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
supra
dismissed
respondent
cause
action
entirety
app
pet
cert
relying
decision
fdic
meyer
district
reasoned
bivens
action
may
maintained
individual
thus
available
petitioner
corporate
entity
app
pet
cert
respect
urena
unnamed
individual
defendants
complaint
dismissed
statute
limitations
grounds
appeals
second
circuit
affirmed
part
reversed
part
remanded
affirmed
dismissal
respondent
claims
individual
defendants
barred
statute
limitations
respondent
challenged
ruling
parties
agree
question
whether
bivens
action
might
lie
private
individual
presented
respect
petitioner
appeals
remarked
meyer
expressly
declined
expand
category
defendants
actions
may
brought
include
federal
agents
federal
agencies
well
quoting
meyer
supra
emphasis
deleted
reasoned
private
entities
like
petitioner
held
liable
bivens
accomplish
important
bivens
goal
providing
remedy
constitutional
violations
granted
certiorari
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
recognized
first
time
implied
private
action
damages
federal
officers
alleged
violated
citizen
constitutional
rights
respondent
asks
extend
limited
holding
confer
right
action
damages
private
entities
acting
color
federal
law
contends
must
recognize
federal
remedy
law
wherever
alleged
constitutional
deprivation
matter
victim
alleged
deprivation
might
alternative
remedies
elsewhere
proposed
remedy
significantly
deter
principal
wrongdoer
individual
private
employee
heretofore
refused
imply
new
substantive
liabilities
circumstances
decline
authority
imply
new
constitutional
tort
expressly
authorized
statute
anchored
general
jurisdiction
decide
cases
arising
constitution
laws
treaties
see
schweiker
chilicky
bush
lucas
first
exercised
authority
bivens
held
victim
fourth
amendment
violation
federal
officers
may
bring
suit
money
damages
officers
federal
bivens
acknowledged
congress
never
provided
private
right
action
federal
officers
fourth
amendment
many
words
provide
enforcement
award
money
damages
consequences
violation
harlan
concurring
judgment
borak
case
especially
clear
example
exercise
federal
judicial
power
accord
damages
appropriate
remedy
absence
express
statutory
authorization
federal
cause
action
finding
special
factors
counseling
hesitation
absence
affirmative
action
congress
found
implied
damages
remedy
available
fourth
decade
following
bivens
recognized
implied
damages
remedy
due
process
clause
fifth
amendment
davis
passman
cruel
unusual
punishment
clause
eighth
amendment
carlson
green
davis
carlson
applied
core
holding
bivens
recognizing
limited
circumstances
claim
money
damages
federal
officers
abuse
constitutional
authority
davis
inferred
new
right
action
chiefly
plaintiff
lacked
remedy
alleged
constitutional
deprivation
davis
bivens
damages
nothing
carlson
inferred
right
action
individual
prison
officials
plaintiff
alternative
federal
tort
claims
act
ftca
claim
reasoned
threat
suit
insufficient
deter
unconstitutional
acts
individuals
bivens
remedy
recoverable
individuals
effective
deterrent
ftca
remedy
also
found
crystal
clear
congress
intended
ftca
bivens
serve
parallel
complementary
sources
liability
since
carlson
consistently
refused
extend
bivens
liability
new
context
new
category
defendants
bush
lucas
supra
declined
create
bivens
remedy
individual
government
officials
first
amendment
violation
arising
context
federal
employment
although
plaintiff
opportunity
fully
remedy
constitutional
violation
held
administrative
review
mechanisms
crafted
congress
provided
meaningful
redress
thereby
foreclosed
need
fashion
new
judicially
crafted
cause
action
even
defendants
alleged
civilian
personnel
stanley
schweiker
chilicky
declined
infer
damages
action
individual
government
employees
alleged
violated
due
process
handling
social
security
applications
observed
decisions
responded
cautiously
suggestions
bivens
remedies
extended
new
contexts
light
decisions
noted
absence
statutory
relief
constitutional
violation
means
necessarily
imply
courts
award
money
damages
officers
responsible
violation
therefore
rejected
claim
bivens
remedy
implied
simply
want
means
challenging
constitutional
deprivation
federal
matter
example
creation
bivens
remedy
obviously
offer
prospect
relief
injuries
must
go
unredressed
see
also
bush
supra
noting
existing
remedies
provide
complete
relief
plaintiff
stanley
supra
irrelevant
special
factors
analysis
whether
laws
currently
books
afford
stanley
adequate
federal
remedy
injuries
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
long
plaintiff
avenue
redress
bedrock
principles
separation
powers
foreclosed
judicial
imposition
new
substantive
liability
chilicky
supra
recently
fdic
meyer
unanimously
declined
invitation
extend
bivens
permit
suit
federal
agency
even
though
agency
congress
waived
sovereign
immunity
otherwise
amenable
suit
opinion
emphasized
purpose
bivens
deter
officer
agency
emphasis
original
citing
carlson
green
supra
reasoned
given
choice
plaintiffs
sue
federal
agency
instead
individual
assert
qualified
immunity
affirmative
defense
extent
aggrieved
parties
less
incentive
bring
damages
claim
individuals
deterrent
effects
bivens
remedy
lost
accordingly
allow
bivens
claim
federal
agencies
mean
evisceration
bivens
remedy
rather
extension
noted
special
factors
counseled
hesitation
light
potentially
enormous
financial
burden
agency
liability
entail
discussion
clear
claim
urged
respondent
fundamentally
different
anything
recognized
bivens
subsequent
cases
years
bivens
jurisprudence
extended
holding
twice
provide
otherwise
nonexistent
cause
action
individual
officers
alleged
acted
unconstitutionally
provide
cause
action
plaintiff
lacked
alternative
remedy
harms
caused
individual
officer
unconstitutional
conduct
circumstances
present
consistently
rejected
invitations
extend
bivens
often
reasons
foreclose
extension
purpose
bivens
deter
individual
federal
officers
committing
constitutional
violations
meyer
made
clear
threat
litigation
liability
adequately
deter
federal
officers
bivens
purposes
matter
may
enjoy
qualified
immunity
plurality
opinion
recognizing
corporations
fare
much
worse
juries
individuals
dissenting
citing
authorities
logic
meyer
inferring
constitutional
tort
remedy
private
entity
like
csc
therefore
foreclosed
respondent
claims
even
meyer
deterrence
rationale
implying
suit
private
corporations
acting
color
federal
law
still
necessary
advance
core
deterrence
purpose
bivens
argues
corporations
respond
market
pressures
make
decisions
without
regard
constitutional
obligations
requiring
payment
constitutional
harms
commit
best
way
discourage
future
harms
may
relevance
bivens
concerned
solely
deterring
unconstitutional
acts
individual
officers
deterring
conduct
entity
purpose
bivens
meyer
implied
damages
remedy
federal
deposit
insurance
corporation
agency
policy
led
meyer
constitutional
deprivation
meyer
supra
bivens
inception
based
premise
deterrence
individual
officers
commit
unconstitutional
acts
reason
us
consider
extending
bivens
beyond
core
premise
begin
federal
prisoners
enjoy
respondent
contemplated
remedy
federal
prisoner
bop
facility
alleges
constitutional
deprivation
may
bring
bivens
claim
offending
individual
officer
subject
defense
qualified
immunity
prisoner
may
bring
bivens
claim
officer
employer
bop
respect
alleged
constitutional
deprivation
remedy
lies
individual
remedy
meyer
found
sufficient
respondent
timely
pursue
whether
makes
sense
impose
asymmetrical
liability
costs
private
prison
facilities
alone
question
congress
us
decide
confronted
situation
claimants
respondent
shoes
lack
effective
remedies
cf
bivens
make
considerably
difficult
respondent
prevail
theory
ordinary
negligence
see
farmer
brennan
eliberate
indifference
describes
state
mind
blameworthy
negligence
also
makes
respondent
situation
altogether
different
bivens
found
alternative
state
tort
remedies
inconsistent
even
hostile
remedy
inferred
fourth
amendment
federal
officer
appears
door
requests
entry
one
always
expected
resist
see
claim
authority
enter
likely
unlock
door
yet
lack
resistance
alone
might
foreclose
cause
action
trespass
privacy
ibid
therefore
reasoned
bivens
implied
constitutional
tort
remedy
remain
ed
alternative
resistance
may
amount
crime
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
logic
apply
respondent
whose
claim
negligence
deliberate
indifference
requires
resistance
official
action
whose
lack
alternative
tort
remedies
due
solely
strategic
inmates
respondent
position
also
full
access
remedial
mechanisms
established
bop
including
suits
federal
injunctive
relief
grievances
filed
bop
administrative
remedy
program
arp
see
cfr
explaining
arp
providing
process
inmates
may
seek
formal
review
issue
relates
aspect
confinement
program
provides
yet
another
means
allegedly
unconstitutional
actions
policies
brought
attention
bop
prevented
recurring
unlike
bivens
remedy
never
considered
proper
vehicle
altering
entity
policy
injunctive
relief
long
recognized
proper
means
preventing
entities
acting
unconstitutionally
sum
respondent
plaintiff
search
remedy
bivens
davis
seek
cause
action
individual
officer
otherwise
lacking
carlson
respondent
instead
seeks
marked
extension
bivens
contexts
advance
bivens
core
purpose
deterring
individual
officers
engaging
unconstitutional
wrongdoing
caution
toward
extending
bivens
remedies
new
context
caution
consistently
repeatedly
recognized
three
decades
forecloses
extension
judgment
appeals
reversed
ordered
correctional
services
corporation
petitioner
john
malesko
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
november
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
join
opinion
agree
narrow
interpretation
rationale
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
logically
produce
application
circumstances
case
dissent
doubtless
correct
broad
interpretation
rationale
logically
produce
application
inclined
inclined
construe
bivens
broadly
joining
opinion
however
mean
imply
narrowest
rationale
bivens
apply
new
context
extend
holding
bivens
relic
heady
days
assumed
powers
create
causes
action
decreeing
implied
mere
existence
statutory
constitutional
prohibition
points
ante
abandoned
power
invent
implications
statutory
field
see
alexander
sandoval
even
greater
reason
abandon
constitutional
field
since
implication
imagined
constitution
presumably
even
repudiated
congress
limit
bivens
two
cases
davis
passman
carlson
green
precise
circumstances
involved
correctional
services
corporation
petitioner
john
malesko
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
november
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
join
dissenting
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
affirmatively
answered
question
reserved
bell
hood
whether
violation
fourth
amendment
federal
agent
acting
color
authority
gives
rise
cause
action
damages
consequent
upon
unconstitutional
conduct
held
violation
eighth
amendment
federal
prison
officials
gave
rise
bivens
remedy
despite
fact
plaintiffs
also
remedy
federal
tort
claims
act
ftca
stated
bivens
established
victims
constitutional
violation
federal
agent
right
recover
damages
official
federal
despite
absence
statute
conferring
right
emphasis
added
subsequent
cases
decided
bivens
remedy
available
every
conceivable
constitutional
never
however
qualified
holding
eighth
amendment
violations
actionable
bivens
see
farmer
brennan
mccarthy
madigan
ever
suggested
category
federal
agents
commit
eighth
amendment
violations
impunity
parties
us
assumed
respondent
complaint
alleged
violation
eighth
violation
committed
federal
agent
private
corporation
employed
bureau
prisons
perform
functions
otherwise
performed
individual
employees
federal
government
thus
question
presented
case
whether
create
exception
straightforward
application
bivens
carlson
whether
extend
cases
beyond
core
premise
ante
point
evident
fact
prior
recent
decision
fdic
meyer
courts
appeals
consistently
correctly
held
corporate
agents
performing
federal
functions
like
human
agents
proper
defendants
bivens
meyer
concluded
federal
agencies
suable
bivens
lead
outcome
reached
today
case
discuss
private
corporate
agents
suggest
agents
viewed
differently
human
ones
rather
meyer
drew
distinction
federal
agents
agency
federal
government
indeed
repeated
references
federal
deposit
insurance
corporation
fdic
status
federal
agency
emphasized
fdic
affinity
federal
sovereign
expressed
concern
damages
sought
directly
federal
agencies
fdic
creat
potentially
enormous
financial
burden
federal
government
must
kept
mind
meyer
involved
fdic
waiver
sovereign
immunity
meyer
recognized
cause
action
permitted
sort
lawsuit
bivens
presumed
impossible
direct
action
government
moreover
meyer
bush
lucas
schweiker
chilicky
dealing
cause
action
cause
action
alleged
meyer
violation
procedural
due
process
meyer
noted
bivens
action
alleging
violation
due
process
clause
fifth
amendment
may
appropriate
contexts
others
substantive
liability
assumed
present
case
respondent
eighth
amendment
claim
falls
heartland
substantive
bivens
meyer
dispose
case
claims
rationales
underlying
bivens
namely
lack
alternative
remedies
deterrence
present
cases
suit
brought
private
corporation
serving
federal
agent
however
common
sense
buttressed
reasons
supported
holding
bivens
leads
conclusion
corporate
agents
treated
favorably
human
agents
first
argues
respondent
enjoys
alternative
remedies
corporate
agent
distinguish
case
bivens
characterizes
bivens
progeny
cases
plaintiffs
lacked
alternative
remedy
ante
bivens
however
even
though
plaintiff
suit
federal
government
state
tort
law
may
barred
sovereign
immunity
suit
officer
state
tort
law
theoretically
possible
moreover
recognized
carlson
bivens
plaintiffs
also
remedies
available
ftca
thus
incorrect
portray
bivens
plaintiffs
lacking
avenue
relief
imply
result
respondent
case
substantially
wider
array
remedies
disposal
bivens
alternative
remedies
provide
sufficient
justification
closing
federal
forum
defendant
private
corporation
claims
individual
defendants
carlson
light
ftca
alternative
rejected
ironic
relies
heavily
holding
assumption
alternative
effective
remedies
primarily
negligence
actions
state
available
respondent
see
ante
like
justice
harlan
think
entirely
proper
injuries
compensable
according
uniform
rules
federal
law
especially
light
large
element
federal
law
must
event
control
scope
official
defenses
liability
bivens
opinion
concurring
judgment
aside
undermining
uniformity
reliance
state
tort
law
jeopardize
protection
full
scope
federal
constitutional
rights
state
law
might
comparable
causes
action
tort
claims
like
eighth
amendment
violation
alleged
see
ante
unconstitutional
actions
prison
employees
violations
equal
protection
due
process
clauses
may
find
parallel
causes
action
state
tort
law
even
though
respondent
may
able
sue
degree
relief
state
law
eighth
amendment
claim
pleaded
negligence
future
plaintiffs
constitutional
claims
less
like
traditional
torts
necessarily
second
claims
deterrence
goals
bivens
served
permitting
liability
ante
citing
meyer
seriously
maintained
however
tort
remedies
corporate
employers
less
deterrent
value
actions
employees
previously
noted
organizational
structure
private
prisons
one
subject
ordinary
competitive
pressures
normally
help
private
firms
adjust
behavior
response
incentives
tort
suits
provide
pressures
necessarily
present
government
departments
richardson
mcknight
thus
private
corporate
entity
issue
readily
distinguishable
federal
agency
meyer
indeed
tragic
consequence
today
decision
clear
incentive
gives
corporate
managers
privately
operated
custodial
institutions
adopt
policies
jeopardize
constitutional
rights
tens
thousands
inmates
raises
concern
imposing
asymmetrical
liability
costs
private
prison
facilities
ante
claims
federal
prisoners
institutions
sue
officers
unfair
permit
federal
prisoners
private
institutions
sue
officer
employer
ibid
permitting
liability
present
case
however
produce
symmetry
private
public
prisoners
unable
sue
principal
government
able
sue
primary
federal
agent
government
official
corporation
indeed
decision
creates
asymmetry
federal
state
prisoners
housed
private
correctional
facilities
state
prisoner
may
sue
private
prison
deprivation
constitutional
rights
see
lugar
edmondson
oil
permitting
suit
private
corporations
exercising
state
action
yet
denies
remedy
prisoner
federal
counterpart
true
never
expressly
held
contours
bivens
identical
however
recognized
sound
jurisprudential
reasons
parallelism
different
standards
claims
state
federal
actors
incongruous
confusing
butz
economou
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
cf
bolling
sharpe
view
decision
constitution
prohibits
maintaining
racially
segregated
public
schools
unthinkable
constitution
impose
lesser
duty
federal
government
value
parallelism
fact
furthered
meyer
since
provided
plaintiff
remedy
pressed
similar
claim
state
agency
apparent
critical
discussion
thoughtful
opinions
justice
harlan
contemporaries
ante
erroneous
statement
question
presented
case
whether
bivens
extended
allow
recovery
private
corporation
employed
federal
agent
ante
driving
force
behind
decision
disagreement
holding
bivens
least
two
reasons
improper
allow
decision
case
influenced
predisposition
first
clear
legislative
materials
cited
carlson
see
also
ante
congress
effectively
ratified
bivens
remedy
surely
congress
never
sought
abolish
second
rule
part
law
years
accorded
full
respect
members
whether
endorsed
rule
first
announced
primary
duty
apply
enforce
settled
law
revise
law
accord
notions
sound
policy
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
petitioner
hardly
unique
regard
bop
since
relied
exclusively
contracts
private
institutions
state
local
governments
operation
halfway
house
facilities
help
federal
prisoners
reintegrate
society
bop
contracts
entities
like
petitioner
also
charitable
organizations
like
volunteers
america
operates
facilities
indiana
louisiana
maryland
minnesota
new
york
texas
salvation
army
arkansas
florida
illinois
north
carolina
tennessee
texas
progress
house
association
oregon
triangle
center
illinois
catholic
social
services
pennsylvania
courts
appeals
divided
whether
fdic
meyer
forecloses
extension
bivens
private
entities
compare
hammons
norfolk
southern
nothing
meyer
prohibits
bivens
claim
private
corporation
engages
federal
action
kauffman
school
sofia
cadc
meyer
conclusion
public
federal
agencies
subject
bivens
liability
follows
equivalent
private
entities
liable
either
hold
today
since
decision
borak
retreated
previous
willingness
imply
cause
action
congress
provided
one
see
central
bank
denver
first
interstate
bank
denver
transamerica
mortgage
advisors
lewis
cannon
university
chicago
rehnquist
concurring
last
term
noted
abandoned
view
borak
decades
ago
repeatedly
declined
revert
understanding
private
causes
action
held
sway
years
ago
alexander
sandoval
justice
stevens
claim
case
implicate
extension
bivens
post
dissenting
opinion
might
come
surprise
appeals
twice
characterized
holding
extending
bivens
liability
reach
private
corporations
see
also
ibid
bivens
liability
extend
private
corporations
justice
stevens
claims
holding
favor
petitioner
portends
tragic
consequence
post
jeopardize
constitutional
rights
tens
thousands
inmates
post
refers
examples
cases
suggesting
private
correctional
providers
routinely
abuse
take
advantage
inmates
control
post
citing
brief
legal
aid
society
new
york
amicus
curiae
see
also
brief
american
civil
liberties
union
amicus
curiae
citing
discussing
abundant
examples
abuse
one
examples
however
private
facility
question
housed
state
prisoners
prisoners
already
enjoy
right
action
private
correctional
providers
true
imperatives
deterring
unconstitutional
conduct
private
correctional
providers
strong
demand
imply
new
right
action
directly
constitution
abuses
authority
less
prevalent
state
facilities
congress
already
provides
liability
trend
appears
opposite
surprising
given
bop
oversight
monitoring
private
contract
facilities
see
brief
amicus
curiae
justice
stevens
mention
government
directed
contractor
thing
subject
claim
recognized
special
circumstance
contractor
may
assert
defense
boyle
technologies
record
provide
basis
defense
footnotes
see
fdic
meyer
schweiker
chilicky
bush
lucas
chappell
wallace
although
might
challenged
sufficiency
respondent
constitutional
claim
see
ante
petitioner
done
see
tr
oral
arg
acknowledgment
petitioner
complaint
eighth
amendment
violation
petition
certiorari
presented
single
question
whether
bivens
cause
action
damages
implied
private
corporation
acting
color
federal
law
pet
cert
see
schowengerdt
general
dynamics
reuber
cadc
gerena
puerto
rico
legal
dobyns
yiamouyiannis
chemical
abstracts
true
one
overruled
circuit
precedent
light
meyer
held
meyer
dictates
exclusion
corporate
entities
bivens
liability
kauffman
school
sofia
cadc
however
another
explained
conclusion
way
compelled
meyer
see
hammons
norfolk
southern
meyer
also
address
present
situation
understood
plaintiff
real
complaint
case
individual
officers
shielded
qualified
immunity
denying
qualified
immunity
private
prison
guards
suit
incorrectly
assumes
asked
imply
new
constitutional
tort
ante
tort
however
well
established
question
whether
remedy
damages
available
limited
class
tortfeasors
recognizes
question
whether
bivens
action
lie
individual
employees
private
corporation
like
correctional
services
corporation
csc
raised
present
case
ante
petitioner
respondent
assumed
bivens
apply
individuals
amicus
maintains
liability
appropriate
bivens
seem
puzzling
bivens
liability
attach
private
individual
employees
corporations
subagents
federal
government
corporate
agents
however
explicitly
maintains
case
reasoning
opinion
relies
least
part
availability
remedy
employees
private
prisons
cf
ante
noting
meyer
found
sufficient
remedy
individual
officer
respondent
timely
pursue
emphasis
added
although
lightly
references
administrative
remedies
might
available
inmates
means
sort
comprehensive
administrative
remedies
previously
contemplated
bush
schweiker
blames
respondent
filed
initial
complaint
pro
se
lack
state
remedies
case
according
respondent
failure
bring
negligence
suit
state
due
solely
strategic
choice
ante
strategic
behavior
generally
speaking
imaginable
basis
case
us
charge
respondent
acting
strategically
cf
ibid
discussing
proving
federal
constitutional
claim
considerably
difficult
proving
state
negligence
claim
respondent
filed
complaint
federal
believed
severely
maltreated
federal
custody
legal
counsel
advise
otherwise
without
aid
counsel
respondent
failed
file
state
relief
also
failed
name
particular
prison
guard
responsible
injuries
resulting
eventual
dismissal
claims
individual
officers
time
barred
respondent
may
unsophisticated
plaintiff
worst
entirely
diligent
determining
identify
guards
hardly
said
strategic
choice
driving
force
behind
respondent
litigation
behavior
amici
respondent
explain
private
prisons
exempt
much
oversight
public
accountability
faced
bureau
prisons
federal
entity
see
brief
legal
aid
society
new
york
amicus
curiae
indeed
private
prison
corporation
first
loyalty
stockholders
rather
public
interest
surprise
measures
jeopardizing
prisoners
rights
likely
private
facilities
public
ones
see
also
ante
scalia
concurring
arguing
bivens
relic
heady
days
limited
along
carlson
green
davis
passman
facts
hostility
core
bivens
new
see
carlson
stevens
dissenting