Connick v. Thompson
Holding
A district attorney's office cannot be held liable under Section 1983 for a failure to train its prosecutors based on a single Brady violation.
Plain English Holding
A district attorney's office cannot be held liable for failing to train its prosecutors when the plaintiff proves only a single violation that has allegedly arisen from the inadequate training.
Judgment
Fifth Circuit reversed, 5-4, in an opinion by Clarence Thomas on Mar 29, 2011. Justice Scalia joined the majority opinion and also wrote a concurrence, joined by Justice Alito, responding to the dissent. Justice Ginsburg dissented, joined by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioners Harry F. Connick, in his official capacity as District Attorney; Eric Dubelier, in his official capacity as Assistant District Attorney; James Williams, in his official capacity as Assistant District Attorney; Leon A. Cannizzaro, Jr., in his official capacity as District Attorney; Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Harry F. Connick, in his official capacity as District Attorney; Eric Dubelier, in his official capacity as Assistant District Attorney; James Williams, in his official capacity as Assistant District Attorney; Leon A. Cannizzaro, Jr., in his official capacity as District Attorney; Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office
- Brief for Respondent John Thompson
Amicus Briefs
- Brief for the District Attorneys Association of the state of New York in support of Petitioner
- Brief for the National District Attorneys Association and the California District Attorney’s Association in Support of Petitioners
- Brief for the Orleans Parish Assistant District Attorneys in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, International City/County Management Association, U.S. Conference of Mayors, and International Municipal Lawyers Association in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Innocence Network in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, and the Southern Poverty Law Center in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Alliance Defense Fund and the CATO Institute in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Center on the Administration of Criminal Law, New York University School Of Law; the Criminal Justice Institute, University of Houston Law Center; The Jacob Burns Center for Ethics In the Practice of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law; The Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics, Fordham University School of Law; and the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Stanford Law School in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Former Federal Civil Rights Officials and Prosecutors Wan J. Kim, Bill Lann Lee, Grace Chung Becker, William Yeomans, John R. Dunne, Stephen J. Pollak, J. Stanley Pottinger, James P. Turner, Edward S.G. Dennis, Jr., David W. Marston, Matthew D. Orwig, John Ratcliffe, and Uttam Dhillon in Support of Respondent
Certiorari-Stage Documents
- Ruling denying retrial below and judgment below (District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana; 5th Circuit en banc panel split evenly, affirming the district court decision)
- Petition for certiorari (unavailable)
- Brief in opposition (unavailable)
- Petitioner’s reply (unavailable)
- Amicus brief of the National District Attorneys Association (unavailable)
- Amicus brief of Orleans Parish Assistant District Attorneys (unavailable)
Recommended Citation: Connick v. Thompson, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/connick-v-thompson/