6 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 1987–2022 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hernandez v. Mesagreen2 sentences2022See id. at ___ (Gorsuch, J., concurring); slip op at 3 (“I would only take the next step and acknowledge explicitly what the Court leaves barely implicit” and overrule Bivens.); Hernández, 589 US at ___; 140 S Ct at 750 (Thomas, J., concurring) (“I write separately because, in my view, the time has come to consider discarding the Bivens doctrine altogether. 2022See id. at ___ (Gorsuch, J., concurring); slip op at 3 (“I would only take the next step and acknowledge explicitly what the Court leaves barely implicit” and overrule Bivens.); Hernández, 589 US at ___; 140 S Ct at 750 (Thomas, J., concurring) (“I write separately because, in my view, the time has come to consider discarding the Bivens doctrine altogether. | 3 | 3 |
Correctional Services Corp. v. Maleskogreen2 sentences2020See Turkmen v Hasty, 789 F3d 218, 265 (CA 2, 2015) (Raggi, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting that “the typical Bivens scenario” arises from “errant conduct by a rogue official”); Correctional Servs Corp v Malesko, 534 US 61, 70 ; 122 S Ct 515 ; 151 L Ed 2d 456 (2001) (“The purpose of Bivens is to deter individual federal officers from committing constitutional violations.”). 2020See Turkmen v Hasty, 789 F3d 218, 265 (CA 2, 2015) (Raggi, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting that “the typical Bivens scenario” arises from “errant conduct by a rogue official”); Correctional Servs Corp v Malesko, 534 US 61, 70 ; 122 S Ct 515 ; 151 L Ed 2d 456 (2001) (“The purpose of Bivens is to deter individual federal officers from committing constitutional violations.”). | 2 | 2 |
Turkmen v. Hastygreen2 sentences2020See Turkmen v Hasty, 789 F3d 218, 265 (CA 2, 2015) (Raggi, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting that “the typical Bivens scenario” arises from “errant conduct by a rogue official”); Correctional Servs Corp v Malesko, 534 US 61, 70 ; 122 S Ct 515 ; 151 L Ed 2d 456 (2001) (“The purpose of Bivens is to deter individual federal officers from committing constitutional violations.”). 2020See Turkmen v Hasty, 789 F3d 218, 265 (CA 2, 2015) (Raggi, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting that “the typical Bivens scenario” arises from “errant conduct by a rogue official”); Correctional Servs Corp v Malesko, 534 US 61, 70 ; 122 S Ct 515 ; 151 L Ed 2d 456 (2001) (“The purpose of Bivens is to deter individual federal officers from committing constitutional violations.”). | 2 | 2 |
Figueroa v. Stategreen2 sentences1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State's sovereign immunity and *647 the State remains immune from a Bivens -type claim"); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass'n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). 1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State’s sovereign immunity and the State remains immune from a Bivens-type claim”); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass’n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). | 1 | 1 |
Figueroa v. Stategreen2 sentences1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State's sovereign immunity and *647 the State remains immune from a Bivens -type claim"); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass'n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). 1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State’s sovereign immunity and the State remains immune from a Bivens-type claim”); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass’n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bush v. Lucas
green
2 sentences2022The process enabled claimants to appeal wrongful terminations with new evidence and arguments along the way, ending in judicial review (which could include review of constitutional claims). 136 The point of contention in Schweiker was that the review process enacted by Congress did not provide for money damages when unconstitutional conduct led to the wrongful denial of benefits. 137 Looking to its caselaw, the Court explained that Congress’s failure to provide for “ ‘complete relief’ ” was not a reason to infer a damages remedy. 138 The bare fact that some injuries would go unredressed was no 2022The process enabled claimants to appeal wrongful terminations with new evidence and arguments along the way, ending in judicial review (which could include review of constitutional claims). 136 The point of contention in Schweiker was that the review process enacted by Congress did not provide for money damages when unconstitutional conduct led to the wrongful denial of benefits. 137 Looking to its caselaw, the Court explained that Congress’s failure to provide for “ ‘complete relief’ ” was not a reason to infer a damages remedy. 138 The bare fact that some injuries would go unredressed was no | 3 | 2022–2022 |
Schweiker v. Chilicky
green
2 sentences2022And the United States Supreme Court likewise has never “extended a Bivens remedy to an alleged substantive or procedural due process violation of the Fifth Amendment by a federal official.” 130 The next consideration is “the availability of another remedy[.]” 131 In this regard, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Schweiker v Chilicky is instructive. 132 In that case, the Court rejected a Bivens claim involving the federal Due Process Clause. 133 The plaintiffs were individuals whose Social Security disability benefits were terminated— most of the plaintiffs appealed and were restore 2022And the United States Supreme Court likewise has never “extended a Bivens remedy to an alleged substantive or procedural due process violation of the Fifth Amendment by a federal official.” 130 The next consideration is “the availability of another remedy[.]” 131 In this regard, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Schweiker v Chilicky is instructive. 132 In that case, the Court rejected a Bivens claim involving the federal Due Process Clause. 133 The plaintiffs were individuals whose Social Security disability benefits were terminated— most of the plaintiffs appealed and were restore | 3 | 2022–2022 |
Rockhouse Mountain Property Owners Ass'n v. Town of Conway
green
2 sentences1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State's sovereign immunity and *647 the State remains immune from a Bivens -type claim"); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass'n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). 1987See Figueroa v Hawaii, 61 Hawaii 369, 382 ; 604 P2d 1198 (1979) ("we are not free to abolish the State’s sovereign immunity and the State remains immune from a Bivens-type claim”); Rockhouse Mtn Property Owners Ass’n v Town of Conway, 127 NH 593; 503 A2d 1385 (1986) (governmental immunity a factor in denying damage remedy for alleged violations of state due process and equal protection). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.