Cases pin-citing al-Kidd · Go Syfert
Search » Famous passages » Cases pin-citing al-Kidd

Cases pin-citing al-Kidd

Ashcroft v. al-Kidd  ·  2011  ·  186 pinpoint citations from 131 cases, 81 distinct passages.

Clark v. Valletta  ·  2025-10-06  ·  Second Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“An overly narrow definition of the right can effectively insulate the government’s actions by making it easy to assert that the narrowly defined right was not clearly established.”
Vinson v. Fair  ·  2025-09-30  ·  E.D. Michigan  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“The general proposition, for example, that an unreasonable search or seizure violates the Fourth Amendment is of little help in determining whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”
Chelette v. Zachary  ·  2025-09-25  ·  M.D. Louisiana  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Wetherbe v. Texas Tech University  ·  2025-05-20  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We can analyze the prongs in either order or resolve the case on a single prong.”
Miles v. Hamm  ·  2025-03-24  ·  M.D. Alabama  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Thomas v. Hines  ·  2025-03-24  ·  N.D. Georgia  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“The general proposition … that an unreasonable search or seizure violates the Fourth Amendment is of little help in determining whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”
(PC) Gordon v. Ikegbu  ·  2024-09-04  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We have repeatedly told courts . . . 18 not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality.”
Myers v. Town of Elkton, Maryland  ·  2024-08-16  ·  D. Maryland  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“While [the clearly established right] standard does not require ‘a case directly on point,’ the case law must be ‘sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.’”
Betty Wade v. Georgia Correctional Health, LLC  ·  2024-07-10  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Fourth Amendment rea- sonableness ‘is predominately an objective inquiry.’”
Black Lives Matter D.C. v. Trump  ·  2024-07-04  ·  District of Columbia  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“When properly applied, [qualified immunity] protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.’”
Dawes v. City of Dallas  ·  2024-04-03  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“[A] panel of this court is bound by circuit precedent.”
Britt v. Doe  ·  2024-03-26  ·  N.D. New York  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Mitchell I”
Jacque v. City of Green Bay  ·  2024-02-27  ·  E.D. Wisconsin  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Rizk v. Seminole County Sheriff  ·  2024-01-26  ·  M.D. Florida  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Villarreal v. City of Laredo  ·  2024-01-23  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“breathing room”
MCCLOUD v. VANSHOYCK  ·  2024-01-19  ·  S.D. Indiana  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
"[J]ust as defining a right too broadly may defeat the purpose of qualified immunity, defining a right too narrowly may defeat the purpose of § 1983"
Paixao v. City of Greenwood  ·  2024-01-02  ·  N.D. Mississippi  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 131 L. Ed. 2d at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Posey v. Farley  ·  2023-11-20  ·  W.D. Texas  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity shields ... state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Martin v. Leiter  ·  2023-10-23  ·  N.D. New York  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We have repeatedly told courts . . . not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality.”
Mascarenas v. Village of Angel Fire, New Mexico  ·  2023-09-30  ·  D. New Mexico  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“A Government official’s conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, the contours of a right are sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.”
Quander v. District of Columbia  ·  2023-09-29  ·  District of Columbia  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“A Government official's conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, the contours of a right are sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.”
Hicks v. LeBlanc  ·  2023-09-05  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity shields . . . state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Babinski v. Sosnowsky  ·  2023-08-21  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
(PC) Smithee v. California Correctional Institution  ·  2023-08-18  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Plaintiffs must point to prior case law that articulates a constitutional rule 5 specific enough to alert these deputies in this case that their particular conduct was unlawful”
FOX v. MAKIN  ·  2023-08-16  ·  D. Maine  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Hamilton v. The City of Wilmer Texas  ·  2023-08-01  ·  N.D. Texas  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Courts should think carefully before expending ‘scarce judicial resources’ to resolve difficult and novel questions of constitutional or statutory interpretation that will ‘have no effect on the outcome of the case.’”
Sapp v. Marcum  ·  2023-07-07  ·  M.D. Florida  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Ohana Control Systems, Inc. v. City & County of Honolulu  ·  2023-06-26  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“The general proposition, for example, that an unreasonable search or seizure violates the Fourth Amendment is of little help in determining whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”
Brown v. Slaubaugh  ·  2023-02-27  ·  W.D. Kentucky  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“a Government official’s conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, the contours of a right are sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right”
Amanda Pierner-Lytge v. Montrell Hobbs  ·  2023-02-23  ·  Seventh Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Kampstra v. Pond  ·  2023-02-17  ·  M.D. Florida  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”
Noble v. City of Eunice  ·  2023-02-16  ·  D. New Mexico  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“A Government official's conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, the contours of a right are sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.”
McCree v. Chester, City of  ·  2023-02-08  ·  D. South Carolina  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“…[E]xisting precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Gilmore v. Georgia Department of Corrections  ·  2023-01-18  ·  S.D. Georgia  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“When properly applied, [qualified immunity] protects all by the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
Humphrey v. Payton  ·  2022-12-20  ·  E.D. Arkansas  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Blake v. Dzurenda  ·  2022-11-18  ·  D. Nevada  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Courts should think 6 || carefully before expending scarce judicial resources to resolve difficult and novel 7 || questions of constitutional or statutory interpretation that will have no effect on 8 || the outcome of the case.”
O'Brien v. Murphy  ·  2022-09-30  ·  E.D. Missouri  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“[L]ower courts have discretion to decide which of the two prongs of qualified immunity analysis to tackle first.”
Ochoa v. County of Kern  ·  2022-09-15  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“the Fourth Amendment regulates conduct rather 12 than thoughts”
Cannata v. Hoag  ·  2022-06-14  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not 17 require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or 18 constitutional question beyond debate.”
Crittindon v. LeBlanc  ·  2022-06-10  ·  Fifth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Biggs v. City of Maryland Heights  ·  2022-05-09  ·  E.D. Missouri  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.”
Nybo, Bradley v. Richardson, Reed  ·  2022-05-03  ·  W.D. Wisconsin  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We ask whether the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the challenged] action. If so, that action was reasonable whatever the subjective intent motivating the relevant officials.”
Montgomery v. Gerdjikian  ·  2022-03-16  ·  D. Colorado  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“[E]xisting precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Salvatore Palma, Jr. v. Matthew Johns  ·  2022-02-28  ·  Sixth Circuit  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“The general proposition . . . that an unreasonable search or seizure violates the Fourth Amendment is of little help in determining whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”
Gholston v. Franklin County Board of Education  ·  2021-11-17  ·  N.D. Alabama  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
Brannan v. City of Mesquite Texas  ·  2021-11-05  ·  N.D. Texas  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“[W]e have consistently examined the actions of defendants individually in the qualified immunity context.”
McClelland v. Katy Independent School District  ·  2021-11-01  ·  S.D. Texas  ·  pin 563 U.S. at 731
“[C]learly established law comes from holdings, not dicta.”
Page 1 of 4   Next →