Legal Document

523 U.S. 574118 S.Ct. 1584140 L.Ed.2d 759 Leonard Rollon CRAWFORD-EL, Petitioner,v.Patricia BRITTON. No. 96-827. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Dec. 1, 1997. Decided May 4, 1998. Syllabus * Petitioner is a litigious and outspoken prisoner in District Columbia's correctional system. Because overcrowding at District's prison, he was transferred, first to Washington State, then facilities several other locations, ultimately Florida. His belongings were transferred separately. When Department Corrections received his from respondent, officer, had petitioner's brother-in-law pick them up, rather than shipping directly next destination. did not recover until months after reached He filed suit under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging, inter alia, that respondent's diversion property motivated by an intent retaliate against him for exercising First Amendment rights. The dismissed complaint. In remanding, en banc Appeals concluded, among things, unconstitutional-motive case, plaintiff must establish motive clear convincing evidence, reasoning Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 800, 102 2727, 73 396, requires special procedures protect defendants costs litigation. Held: erred fashioning heightened burden proof cases public officials. Pp. ____-____. (a) That court adopted evidence requirement deal with potentially serious problem: because official's state mind easy allege hard disprove, insubstantial claims turning on improper may be less amenable summary disposition types government standard intended servants burdens trial discovery impair performance their official duties. P. ____. (b) 's holding does support imposition plaintiff's affirmative case. Harlow, found President's senior aides advisers protected qualified immunity would permit defeat without resort trial. announced single objective judging defense, shielding officials "liability civil damages insofar as conduct violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights which reasonable person have known,'' U.S., 818, S.Ct., 2738, eliminated subjective standard, put forth Wood Strickland, 420 308, 95 992, 43 214, "bare allegations malice'' could rebut 817-818, 2737-2738. However, concerning defendant's intent, although irrelevant essential component Since related only scope it provides no making any change nature proving violation. (c) One reason implicit holding-fairness official-provides justification plaintiffs who unlawful motive. Two reasons underlying holding-that strong interest protecting actions best served defense permitting lawsuits quickly terminated, motivation might been used shield baseless suits judgment-would provide type procedural rule here. countervailing concerns indicate balance struck context defining appropriate when evaluating elements cause action. Initially, there important distinction between bare malice provided basis rebutting more specific are certain claims. latter instance, example, primary emphasis disadvantage all members class includes deter comment issue importance, possible animus directed plaintiff. Moreover, existing law already prevents this narrow element unconstitutional automatically carrying Summary judgment available if doubt illegality particular conduct; and, least claims, causation well Unlike various causes action should ordinarily preclude (d) Without precedential grounding, changing entire category stray far traditional limits judicial authority. Neither text §1983 federal statute nor Federal Rules Civil Procedure imposing proof. Appeals' unprecedented lacks common-law pedigree alters way undermines §1983's very purpose-to remedy violation This has consistently declined similar invitations revise rules separate defense. See, e.g., Gomez Toledo, 446 635, 639-640, 100 1920, 1923-1924, 64 572. To extent concerned preventing discovery, such questions most frequently effectively resolved rulemaking legislative process. court's indirect effort regulate employs blunt instrument high cost also imposes upon bona fide Congress fashioned discourage inmates' Prison Litigation Reform Act, draws require those do not. If compelling need frame new based distinction, presumably done so will respond future legislation. (e) Existing judges use handling involve examination mind. 93 F.3d 813, vacated remanded. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion Court, KENNEDY, SOUTER, GINSBURG, BREYER, JJ., joined. concurring opinion. REHNQUIST, C. dissenting opinion, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, THOMAS, Daniel M. Schember, Washington, DC, petitioner. Walter A. Smith, Jr., Atlanta, GA, respondents. Jeffrey Minear, amicus curiae leave Court. Justice STEVENS 1 Petitioner, long-time prison inmate, seeks corrections officer claim broad question presented whether courts appeals craft whether, brought prisoners, adduce order motion judgment. 2 serving life sentence During confinement assisted prisoners cases. interviews reporters written news stories about conditions. prisoner. 3 events gave rise case occurred 1988 1989. Columbia Lorton, Virginia, petitioner inmates county jail Spokane, Washington. Thereafter, moved, State later facility Cameron, Missouri, back Petersburg, Marianna, Three boxes containing personal belongings, including legal materials, facility, asked up sending shipped Marianna mother, expense, but initially denied permission receive they sent outside channels. finally recovered arrival 4 contends respondent deliberately misdirected punish future. Beyond generalized hostility, alleges incidents speech provoked her.1 claimed injury caused delay receiving having purchasing clothes items interim, mental emotional distress. Respondent denies retaliatory asserts she entrusted brother-in-law, employee, ensure its prompt safe delivery. 5 Although factual dispute relatively simple, engendered litigation both protracted complex. We shall briefly describe proceedings led decision we reviewing, summarize decision. Early Proceedings 6 seeking §1983.2 principal theory advanced original complaint diverted materials interfere right access courts. 7 Prior relying part moved dismissal appealed, arguing, first, time her acts; second, "failed satisfy "heightened pleading standard' circuit applies damage officials.'' 951 F.2d 1314, 1316 (C.A.D.C.1991). 8 agreed 1989, wrongful sufficiently detailed withstand dismiss even Circuit's standard.'' Id., 1318, 1321. however, actual ability litigate insufficient standard; accordingly, dismissed. 1321-1322. contours clarified while appeal, see Hunter Columbia, 943 69 (C.A.D.C.1991), concluded allowed replead. 9 On remand, amended adding detail two claims: due process alleged legally insufficient, retaliation "direct motive.'' 844 F.Supp. 795, 802 (D.D.C.1994). was, effect, mandated prior decisions circumstantial dismiss. See Martin D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, 812 1425, 1435 (C.A.D.C.1987); Siegert Gilley, 895 797, 800-802 (C.A.D.C.1990), aff'd grounds, 500 226, 111 1789, 114 277 (1991). En Banc Proceeding 10 A panel affirmed suggested review claim. Accordingly, ordered parties file briefs addressing five questions, power Circuit supplement requirements bringing Government officials,3 grounds granting motions "where unlawfulness depends actor's motive.''4 fifth catch-all "any alternative devices immunity, tort depending litigation?'' App. Pet. Cert. 109a. 11 responded these opinions. majority appear four propositions: (1) remanded further proceedings; (2) requirement, rely direct evidence;5 (3) prevail evidence; (4) required Court's 396 (1982). 12 Judge Williams, conclusions: "First, think allows get resolution issue, mind, before engaged issue. Second, believe unless offers state-of-mind trial, verdict (as appropriate) granted individual defendant.'' 815 (C.A.D.C.1996). 13 Silberman criticized Williams' approach confusing, id., 833, Harlow's pointed "more straightforward solution,'' 834. whenever defendant legitimate action, inquiry into pretextuality allowed. "If facts purported reasonable, entitled immunity.'' Ibid. 14 Ginsburg impose accept "grant hand'' sufficient standard. 839. described innovation "a bold intrusion district management fact-finding process'' result meritorious "invite increase number torts committed.'' allow limited proper showing ruling motion, noted involving abuse discretion judge fail consider, interests parties, "but social associated official.'' 840. With reference hand, expressed view show reveal appeared record, discovery. 841-844. 15 Henderson "fully'' endorsed plurality's thought mistake colleagues hear record made abundantly merit. 844-845. 16 Chief Edwards, joined judges, ""crossing line adjudication legislation.''' 847 (quoting Frankfurter, Some Reflections Reading Statutes, 47 Colum. L. Rev 527, 535 (1947)). evidentiary standards unauthorized precedent "would make officials-whether meritorious-would never able survive assertion 17 different views opinions attest importance correct understanding relationship our (1982), entitlement relief Despite relative unimportance therefore decided grant certiorari. 520 ----, 117 2451, 138 210 (1997). II 18 latest address "easy disprove,'' turn F.3d, 816, 821. implicates obvious subjecting liability damages. Courts grappled problem, none 851-852, n. (Edwards, C.J., judgment) (citing cases). 19 local officials, classes official, federal, local. Butz Economou, 438 478, 500-504, 98 2894, 2907-2910, 57 (1978). applies, moreover, wide array necessary element, race gender discrimination Equal Protection Clause,6 cruel unusual punishment Eighth Amendment,7 termination employment political affiliation Amendment,8 exercise free rights.9 regarded sweeping corollary Harlow. 20 There is, course, difference supports holding. shall, therefore, begin explaining why resolve case-indeed, consider nevertheless conclusion Appeals. Specific Holding 21 1968, Ernest Fitzgerald testified congressional subcommittee technical difficulties excessive incurred development transport plane. testimony widely reported evidently embarrassed superiors Defense. 1970, job analyst Air Force "departmental reorganization reduction force.'' Nixon 731, 733, 2690, 2693, 349 After extended Service Commission 1973, President some alleging testimony. sought "in Constitution.'' 748, 2700. charges reviewed considered defendants' held former absolute predicated within 749, 2701. advisors 808-813, 2732-2736, instead "qualified trial.'' 2736. 22 Our definition informed three propositions earlier First, 639-641, 572 (1980), "the rests 503-504, 2909-2910, determined same Constitution, "competent determine level Third, Scheuer Rhodes, 416 232, 94 1683, 40 90 (1974), presumed protects officers executive branch performing discretionary functions, 245-248, 1691-1692, presumption rebuttable, 249-250, 1692-1693. 23 subject debate 214 (1975), school board. overcome ways, either "knew reasonably known took sphere responsibility student affected,'' "he malicious intention deprivation student.'' 322, 1001. dissent, Powell argued majority's too demanding proposed like majority's, included component. view, standard: "whether light responsibilities office, circumstances time, acted good faith. '' 330, 1005 (emphasis added). 24 consensus formulation immunity. Speaking 25 "Consistently aimed Butz, conclude today suffice broad-reaching hold functions generally shielded known.'' 2738. 26 Under rebutted otherwise improperly motivated. Evidence simply 27 cannot implicate initial It obvious, equally charge For Fitzgerald's retaliated speaking out matter concern.10 consideration issues itself assumed defenses.11 Thus, 28 Nevertheless, makes just (a pure fact), violated law, "essentially question.'' Mitchell Forsyth, 472 511, 526-529, 105 2806, 2815-2817, 86 411 (1985); Gomez, 640, 1924 (" [T]his indicated relevant existence action''). Indeed, logically govern 815, 838. Such Reasoning 29 explicit together third holding, amply justified reformulation actions.12 permits terminated. contrast, raises challenged conduct-questions normally can focusing reasonableness acts,'' 819, 2739, avoids unfairness "could expected anticipate subsequent developments, . fairly said "know' forbade previously identified unlawful,'' 2738.13 present motivated, part, hostility 30 last rationale fairness misconduct plainly occurred. While liability-indeed, bear trial-for engaging objectively occurred, attributed one accountable knew, known, much: established, fail, since competent know governing conduct.'' 818-819, 2738; 506, 2911 [I]t unfair liable knows acting ''). 31 harder plaintiff, especially whose motive, But concluding expressly "between evils inevitable alternative.'' 813-814, emphasized: "In situations offer realistic avenue vindication guarantees.'' 814, Social adequately elimination necessarily justify limitations realistic'' guarantees. 32 here, unlike revision bar depend Strickland Wood, mere allegation "other injury,'' rights, permitted open-ended motivation. 1000-1001. violation, focus plaintiff; rather, specific, see, Davis, 426 229, 239-248, 96 2040, 2047-2052, 48 597 (1976), importance. content testimony, harm, hated demonstrate responding comments conditions, 33 eliminates motive-based law. Even general long (for bars speech), substantive doctrine relies facilitate ways. concern). Anderson Creighton, 483 640-641, 107 3034, 3039-3040, 97 (1987). violation-there causation. employee shows "motivating factor'' adverse decision, employer still prevails absence conduct. Mt. Healthy City Bd. Ed. Doyle, 429 274, 287, 568, 576, 50 471 (1977). Furthermore, mechanisms enable weed feature explain Part IV, infra.14 34 places thumb side scales merits knowingly being resolved. And, fortiori, policy SCALIA's proposal immunize "objectively valid,'' regardless post, __. III 35 relied almost entirely As explained, neither warrant wholesale espoused. 36 statute, Procedure, stage itself. defense; series defenses, repeatedly viewed decision-a "predicated historically accorded common behind it.'' Imbler Pachtman, 424 409, 421, 984, 990, 128 (1976); 2909-2910; Wyatt Cole, 504 158, 170-172, 112 1827, 1834-1836, 118 (1992) (KENNEDY, concurring).15 purpose §1983-to rights.16 37 past refused requiring pleadings specificity municipal liability, Leatherman Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence Coordination Unit, 507 163, 164-169, 113 1160, 1161-1163, 122 517 (1993). exception settled interlocutory appellate jurisdiction rejected argument policies sufficiency. Johnson Jones, 515 304, 317-318, 115 2151, 2158-2159, 132 238 (1995). unanimous rulings apply equal force 38 noted, large reduce availability regarding pleading, Leatherman, 168-169, 1163. carries cost, Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 242, 252-255, 106 2505, 2512-2514, 91 202 (1986). 39 recent highlights concern actions. Both Silberman's below brief suggest warranted inmates. 830, 838; Brief Missouri et al. Amici Curiae 12. Arguably, deserve attention many frivolous desire obtain "holiday court,''17 expectation tangible relief. assuming perceived problem creation cover Pub.L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, enacted April 1996, contains provisions filing unlikely succeed. Among changes relating suits, pay fees; forma pauperis status "strikes'' (dismissals frivolous, malicious, fails granted) "under imminent danger physical §804(d); injury; attorney's directs screen prisoners' complaints docketing authorizes own "frivolous,'' "malicious,'' meritless actions; revocation credits false claims; encourages hearings telecommunication unnecessary inmate pretrial proceedings. U.S.C.A. §§1346(b)(2), 1915, 1915A, 1932 (Supp.1997); §1997e (Supp.1997). Recent statistics Act effect.18 41 Most significantly, dealt IV ""firm application Procedure' fully warranted'' lead 819-820, 35, 508, 2911-2912). Though solution, aware potential troubled court. add few words files substance subjected burdensome options all. reply party's answer Rule 7(a), definite statement 12(e). insist "put forward nonconclusory allegations'' causing cognizable prediscovery 236, 1795, (1991) judgment). option exists chooses plead threshold so, truth allegations, law.19 defendant-official, choose resolving question, sometimes complicated analysis issues. 44 survives hurdles viable, vests tailor narrowly dictate sequence 45 "may alter [the Rules] depositions interrogatories limit length requests 36. frequency methods determines (iii) expense outweighs likely benefit, taking account needs amount controversy, parties' resources, stake litigation, issues.'' 26(b)(2). 46 Additionally, place, manner altogether subjects, "to party annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, undue expense.'' 26(c). And set timing 26(d). These create judge. take focused deposition allowing additional Martin, F.2d, 1437 (R. B. Ginsburg, J.). Alternatively, postpone suffered actually object retaliation. manage efficient lawsuit; gathered, defendant-official move partial dispositive disputes credibility assessments.20 Of give priority took, early possible. Anderson, 646, 6, 3042.21 others mentioned, serves ultimate truly At stage, properly supported motion,22 attacks credibility, identify jury find carried pertinent 256-257, 2514. Finally, undoubtedly familiar tools extreme harassment: 11, sanctions papers lacking support, "presented purpose, harass''; §1915(e)(2) (Supp.1997), "at time'' "frivolous malicious.'' 49 ourselves experience managing element. Given variety "constitutional tort'' confront, factfinding useful equitable categorical imposed vacated, consistent 51 ordered. 52 concurring. 53 Prisoner illustrate worst. obey always Constitution. worst invoke basic charter fall somewhere farcical foster disrespect laws. 54 guard disdain Madison reminds us, Constitution endure, age retain "th[e] veneration bestows.'' James Madison, Federalist 49, p. 314 (C. Rossiter ed.1961). THE CHIEF JUSTICE addresses concerns. I am full agreement authority propose far-reaching solutions lies Legislative Branch, us. 55 whom O'CONNOR joins, dissenting. 56 petition certiorari presents questions. asks: claiming prove "clear convincing' evidence?'' i. 58 gives extensive treatment, applying placing resolved.'' Ante, second 59 allegedly act act, evidence-no how strong-shows unconstitutional?'' 60 explicitly discuss Its failure puzzling unfortunate. Puzzling, "threshold'' addressed Unfortunate, "no,'' establishes considerable tension with, significantly undermines, 61 directly, conclude, along lines below, challenged, unable establish, reliance offered pretext. purposes doctrine. 62 White House Bryce Alexander Butterfield, concert Richard others, conspired deprive job, deny reemployment, besmirch reputation. 738-739, 18, 2695-2696, Butterfield immune suit, President.'' 806, 2731-2732. President, petitioners "application 2735-2736. 63 write blank slate. notion jurisprudence Osborn Bank States, Wheat. 738, 865-866, L.Ed. 204 (1824). By come understand "objective'' "subjective'' aspect. 1000-1001, (1975). test often produced results odds doctrine's purpose. faith fact "inherently jury,'' impossible accomplish goal "insubstantial claims'' proceed 2737. "special costs'' inquiries "broad-ranging,'' intrusive, personal, "peculiarly disruptive effective government.'' 817, 65 Recognizing problems, "purged'' remolded turned "objective reasonableness,'' measured act. 517, 2810-2811, supra, 2738-2739. ensured benefit predict what stand undertaken course work. Davis Scherer, 468 183, 195, 104 3012, 3019-3020, 82 139 (1984) ("The recognizes fear harassing unjustified terminated''). "across board'' regard "precise officials' duties precise character violated.'' 642-643, 3041, 66 Applying principles form necessary, given factors. enough say area "clearly established,'' turns available. logic apparently approves "protracted complex,'' ante, __, runs afoul prevented going ensures disruptive'' designed prevent.1 strip protections simple pleading-any minimally attorney (or pro se litigant) convert tort, thereby measure worlds. 67 quite inconsistent Harlow.2 preserve conferred, construct exclusively factors, investigations favor. accomplishes goal. test, taken immediate lawful through 68 interpretation differ mine. __ ("Under Harlow] defense''). not, carry logical extension. difficult exactly rejects my position, possibilities. appears extension mean go unredressed. ("Social realistic' guarantees''). perhaps true, refuse Every privilege created extended, understood heard. legislatures immunities societal confer whatever terms unremedied crafting doctrine, implications decisions. 167, 1832-1833, (1992). 70 considering desirable reflect subspecies Britton officer; Crawford-El Florida, intermediate stops way. Britton's lawsuit asking Crawford-El's former's delivery him, itself, seem conceived. deliver previous given, filed. illicit asserts, transforms routine administration tort. 71 cites Pickering Board Township High School Dist. 205, Will Cty., 391 563, 88 1731, 811 (1968) example sort 9. distant cousin case; board stated discharging teacher writing letter newspaper criticizing disputed, letter. Closer point Branti Finkel, 445 507, 1287, 574 cited complained Republican assistants newly appointed Democratic defender. Objective evidence-the supervisor another party, replacement supervisor's party-would attempted firing assistants. propose. 72 Still distantly call cases, where Examples Reno American Liberties Union, 521 2329, 874, (1997) (finding portions Communications Decency Amendment); Barnes Glen Theatre, 501 560, 2456, (concluding Indiana regulating nude dancing Brown Hartlage, 456 45, 1523, 732 (1982) (invalidating Kentucky candidates office); Nebraska Press Assn. Stuart, 427 539, 2791, 683 (1976) judge's prohibiting reporting commentary murder trial); Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. Conrad, 546, 1239, 448 (1975) denial theater Hair restraint); New York Times Co. 403 713, 2140, 822 (1971) (per curiam) (refusing enjoin publication contents classified study). great body freedom would, unaffected prototypically one: charged doing normal duties-an absolutely connection speech-but performed speak freely. surely us pretextual. factfinder's determination modest respondent. 74 Also incur request §1983. "deter actors using badge individuals federally guaranteed victims deterrence fails,'' substantially proceed. 161, 1830. exercised "federally rights.'' Providing compensation meritorious, increased freedoms hypothetical who, deterred misdirecting belongings. 75 minor. benefits significant, recognized before. above, government'' threat instances conscientious shrink choices.3 76 arguments thus strongly favor extending suggest. suggests unnecessary. assumes alert dangers judicious skillful manipulation Procedure. __-__. matter, capable regard. protection willingness creative Rules. vary brings suit. Cf. 643, 3040-3041 ("An variants modes assurance provide''). inconsistency applied good-faith stripped 2737 ("And inherently jury''). 77 My supply consistency predictability progeny eliminating altogether. dependent varying approaches 700-odd not; end day, No position certainty delivering prisoner's investigation so. faithful 78 THOMAS 79 observed earlier, treatment existed enacted, subsume. Burns Reed, 498, 1934, 1945, 547 (SCALIA, part). well. 1961 bears scant resemblance century earlier. refer, Monroe Pape, 365 81 473, 492 (1961), converted 1871 covering violations committed color ordinance, regulation, custom, usage State,'' Rev. §1979, added), indeed stark criminal Monroe, 481-482; 224-225, 504-505 (Frankfurter, dissenting). 829 (1996), changed generated years pours tens thousands each year, engages losing struggle prevent degenerating (The package, example.) sane enacted. 80 engaged, essentially activity sensible scheme invented-rather embodied wrote. preference undiluted form, Appeals: reasonableness'' relates intent-based torts. JUSTICE's sets "along Silberman,'' differs significant respect: introduction evidence'' constitutionally valid complained-of "is pretext.'' consist, presumably, intent-for remarks partisan-political admission produces subjective-free once finds admit knew violating here: asserted (e.g., fired incompetence incompetent), something genuine incompetent Republican). severe restriction "intent-based'' torts; off consequence be, actionable somehow involved somewhat precisely asked, relevance probe government. threatens "Balkanize'' 3040-3041, 3042, (1987) ("We unwilling complicate violated. An elegantly Learned Hand, oft-cited passage, wrote: "It saying guilty powers vent spleen escape injuries cause; practice confine guilty, monstrous recovery. founded tried, submit innocent outcome, dampen ardor resolute, irresponsible, unflinching discharge duties.FCS..... alternative. instance better unredressed wrongs dishonest try duty constant dread retaliation.'' Gregoire Biddle, 177 579, 581 (C.A.2 1949)(L. J.), cert. denied, 339 949, 803, 1363 (1950).

Classification Label: 1