Leah Litman

So as we were kind of previewing earlier, there are a bunch of obstacles that, again, getting back to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has created to actually sue federal officers for violating your rights.

Now, Congress, you know, in the aftermath of the Civil War passed.

This law called Section 1983.

It's a general civil rights statute.

And that's the law that allows you to sue state and local officers who violate your constitutional rights.

That's what's called a cause of action.

Like it is the legal authorization to bring suit.

Congress has not passed a similar law that allows you to sue federal officers for violating your constitutional rights.

So what happens then?

Well, back in the good old days, the Supreme Court stepped into the breach in a case, Bivens versus six unnamed agents of the FBI.

The Supreme Court said, when your rights are violated by a federal officer and you don't have another remedy,

then you can sue those officers for damages.

The Bivens case was some law enforcement officers who break into a guy's house, ransack it, force him to stand naked, and then they don't try him for anything.

And oftentimes when the government violates the Fourth Amendment, they do so in the course of obtaining evidence that they use at your trial.

So what's your remedy then?

It is asking the court to exclude that evidence.

That remedy isn't available if you're not charged with a crime.

And so in Bivens, the Supreme Court said for people like Bivens, it's damages or nothing.

And in that circumstance, we recognize that courts have the authority to afford traditional forms of relief like damages.

So that used to be the case.