Document Type
Article
Publication Title
Touro Law Review
Publication Date
Spring 2000
Abstract
There were two Supreme Court cases on qualified immunity. I want to be sure to cover those. There was also a case that was almost decided by the Court and I would like to spend a little more attention on that one.
The cases on qualified immunity that were decided emphasized and perhaps changed the law, a little bit, on the sequence of deciding issues in a section 1983 case. At one time, when someone would assert that his or her constitutional rights were violated, the defense to such an assertion was that this is not a constitutional right. Even if there was a constitutional right, there is doubt as to whether such a right was clearly established, thereby entitling the government official to qualified immunity. The courts for the most part would not get into the issue of whether there was a constitutional right because in any event the right was not clearly established at the time. The Supreme Court dealt with that issue a second time, and it is an easy way to get out of the whole issue.
Recommended Citation
Leon Friedman,
Qualified Immunity When Facts Are in Dispute, 16 Touro L. Rev. 857
(2000)
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/228