Citation network
Bush Vs. Lucas
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 13, 1983
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 367 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Bush v. LucasSearch
-
U.S. 367 (1983) Bush v. LucasSearch
-
a detailed review of the record and the applicable authorities, applied the balancing test articulated in Pickering v. BoardSearch
-
s motion for summary judgment. It held, first, that the defamation claim could not be maintained because, under Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
U.S. 914 (1980), and directed that it reconsider the case in the light of our intervening decision in Carlson v. GreenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
a cause of action is stated by a plaintiff's claim that he has been injured by a violation of the Constitution, Bell v. HoodSearch
-
held that the Constitution itself supports a private cause of action for damages against a federal official. Bivens v. SixSearch
-
damages have been regarded as the ordinary remedy for an invasion of personal interests in liberty. See Nixon v. CondonSearch
-
Constitutional Legality and the Law of Torts in Bell v. HoodSearch
-
West v. CabellSearch
-
U. S. 376 action by Congress. We are not dealing with a question of 'federal fiscal policy,' as in United States v. StandardSearch
-
recognizing a federal cause of action for violation of Fourth Amendment rights by federal officials. In Davis v. PassmanSearch
-
may not recover damages from those responsible for their injury. Id. at 442 U. S. 246 -247. Carlson v. GreenSearch
-
at 403 U. S. 396 , we illustrated our meaning by referring to Page 462 U. S. 379 United States v. StandardSearch
-
Oil Co., 332 U. S. 301 , 332 U. S. 311 , 316 (1947), and United States v. GilmanSearch
-
See Carlson v. GreenSearch
-
In Marbury v. MadisonSearch
-
See Bivens v. SixSearch
-
United States v. LeeSearch
-
Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
Jacobs v. UnitedSearch
-
Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
other remedy to vindicate the underlying right, unless there is an express textual command to the contrary. Cf. Davis v. PassmanSearch
-
Bivens v. SixSearch
-
to civil service employees who are discharged or disciplined in violation of their First Amendment rights, cf. Carlson v. GreenSearch
-
Sonntag v. DooleySearch
-
Sampson v. MurraySearch
-
Finfer v. CaplinSearch
-
Pelicone v. HodgesSearch
-
the qualified immunity of executive officials, as he might be required to in a suit for money damages. See Butz v. EconomouSearch
-
disadvantages of the civil service procedure -- that it denies the claimant the option of a jury trial, see Carlson v. GreenSearch
-
Page 462 U. S. 392 only limited judicial review, rather than a full trial in federal court, see Chandler v. RoudebushSearch
-
Halperin v. KissingerSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Bush v. LucasSearch
-
Pickering v. BoardSearch
-
of the Constitution, Bell v. HoodSearch
-
See Nixon v. CondonSearch
-
United States v. StandardSearch
-
In Davis v. PassmanSearch
-
and United States v. GilmanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial