Hernandez v. Mesa

Pending petition
Docket No.
Op. Below
Argument
TBD
Opinion
TBD
Vote
TBD
Author
TBD
Term
TBD

Issues: (1) Whether, when the plaintiffs plausibly allege that a rogue federal law enforcement officer violated clearly established Fourth and Fifth amendment rights for which there is no alternative legal remedy, the federal courts can and should recognize a damages claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics; and (2) whether, if the federal courts do not recognize such a claim, the Westfall Act violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment insofar as it pre-empts state-law torts suits for damages against rogue federal law enforcement officers acting within the scope of their employment for which there is no alternative legal remedy.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders
Jun 15 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 20, 2018)
Jul 18 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 20, 2018 to August 4, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
Jul 20 2018Brief amicus curiae of Government of the United Mexican States filed.
Jul 20 2018Brief amicus curiae of Professor Gregory C. Sisk filed.
Jul 23 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 6, 2018.
Aug 06 2018Response to petition from respondent Jesus Mesa, Jr. filed.
Aug 17 2018Reply of petitioner Jesus C. Hernández, et al. filed. VIDED.
Aug 22 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
Oct 01 2018The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY