The federal courts face an ongoing stream of §1983 complaints alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment right to be free of an unreasonable seizure by a government agent. The most common of these claims assert arrest without probable cause, excessive force, and malicious prosecution. In Manuel v. City of Joliet, 137 S.Ct. 911 (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that an arrestee’s §1983 Fourth Amendment unreasonable seizure claim may challenge his pretrial detention, including detention after the issuance of legal process, such as a judicial determination of probable cause. The court, however, sidestepped the major issue of whether a §1983 malicious prosecution claim can be premised on a violation of Fourth Amendment rights.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion for the court, in which Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor joined. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented.
‘Manuel’
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
