Supreme Court Rules in Egbert v. Boule
In a 6-3 decision released on June 8, the Supreme Court ruled that claims filed by individuals under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics against federal agents do not extend to Fourth Amendment claims of excessive force or First Amendment claims of retaliation.
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
In a 6-3 decision released on June 8, the Supreme Court ruled that claims filed by individuals under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics against federal agents do not extend to Fourth Amendment claims of excessive force or First Amendment claims of retaliation.
The ruling prevents Washington inn owner Robert Boule from bringing a Bivens lawsuit against U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Agent Erik Egbert after a physical and verbal altercation in which Boules argued that Egbert violated his Fourth and First Amendment rights.
You can read the ruling here or below:
