Minneci v. Pollard
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Nov 1, 2011
|Jan 10, 2012||8-1||Breyer||OT 2011|
Holding: Because state tort law authorizes adequate alternative damages actions in this case, no Bivens remedy can be implied.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Reversed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on January 10, 2012. Justice Scalia wrote a separate concurring opinion, which was joined by Justice Thomas, but also joined the Court’s opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion.
- Argument recap: Bivens hurdle too high (Lyle Denniston)
- Argument preview: A new Bivens remedy? (Lyle Denniston)
- New curb on Bivens remedy? (Lyle Denniston)