Qualified immunity

Qualified immunity

Qualified immunity is a doctrine in U.S. federal law that arises in cases brought against state officials under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and against federal officials under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for the violation of an individual's federal constitutional rights. This grant of immunity is available to state or federal employees performing discretionary functions where their actions, even if later found to be unlawful, did not violate "clearly established law." The defense of qualified immunity was created by the U.S. Supreme Court, replacing a court's inquiry into a defendant's subjective state of mind with an inquiry into the objective reasonableness of the contested action. A government agent's liability in a federal civil rights lawsuit now no longer turns upon whether the defendant acted with "malice," but on whether a hypothetical reasonable person in the defendant's position would have known that her actions violated clearly established law.

As outlined by the Supreme Court in "Harlow v. Fitzgerald", 457 U.S. 800 (1982),ref|citation qualified immunity is designed to shield government officials from actions "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

In 2001, the Supreme Court in Saucier v. Katz established a rigid order in which courts must decide the merits of a defendant's qualified immunity defense. First, the court determines whether the complaint states a constitutional violation. If so, the next sequential step is to determine whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the official's conduct. In a 2008 grant of certiorari in Pearson v. Callahan, the Supreme Court asked the parties to brief and argue the question of whether Saucier v. Katz should be overruled.

ee also

* Immunity (legal)

References

*ussc|457|800|Text of the opinion on Findlaw.com


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужно решить контрольную?

Look at other dictionaries:

  • qualified immunity — see immunity Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law. Merriam Webster. 1996 …   Law dictionary

  • immunity — im·mu·ni·ty /i myü nə tē/ n pl ties [Latin immunitas, from immunis exempt from public service, exempt, from in non + munis (from munia services)] 1: exemption from a duty or liability that is granted by law to a person or class of persons a… …   Law dictionary

  • Immunity — Immunity: Medicine Immunity (medical), resistance of an organism to infection or disease. Immunity (journal), a scientific journal published by Cell Press Law Amnesty law, immunity from past crimes Charitable immunity, immunity from liability… …   Wikipedia

  • immunity — Exemption, as from serving in an office, or performing duties which the law generally requires other citizens to perform; e.g. exemption from paying taxes. Freedom or exemption from penalty, burden, or duty. Special privilege. See also exemption… …   Black's law dictionary

  • immunity — Exemption, as from serving in an office, or performing duties which the law generally requires other citizens to perform; e.g. exemption from paying taxes. Freedom or exemption from penalty, burden, or duty. Special privilege. See also exemption… …   Black's law dictionary

  • Immunity (legal) — In law, immunity is the status of a person or body that places them beyond the law and makes them free from legal obligations, such as liability for torts or damages or prosecution under criminal law.* Amnesty law, immunity from past crimes*… …   Wikipedia

  • Charitable immunity — is a legal doctrine which holds that a charitable organization is not liable under tort law. It originated in 19th century Britain.[1][2] The early form of charitable immunity in England did not provide immunity from suit; it only protected… …   Wikipedia

  • Mitchell v. Forsyth — Supreme Court of the United States Argued February 27, 1985 Decided June 19, 1985 …   Wikipedia

  • Hope v. Pelzer — SCOTUSCase Litigants=Hope v. Pelzer ArgueDate=April 17 ArgueYear=2002 DecideDate=June 27 DecideYear=2002 FullName=Larry Hope v. Pelzer USVol=536 USPage=730 Citation= Prior=Grant of qualified immunity affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit, 240 F.3d 975 …   Wikipedia

  • O'Connor v. Ortega — Supreme Court of the United States Argued October 16, 1986 Decided March 31, 1987 …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”