Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Bivens, Border Enforcement Case (Egbert v. Boule)
Official Supreme Court Photo
Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Egbert v. Boule. The issues in the case are (1) whether a cause of action exists under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics for First Amendment retaliation claims; and (2) whether a cause of action exists under Bivens for claims against federal officers engaged in immigration-related functions for allegedly violating a plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights.
A detailed recap can be found on Law & Crime and Howard Wasserman’s post on SCOTUSBlog. Wasserman sees “[t]he point of departure in the argument in Egbert v. Boule was whether the involvement of a Customs and Border Patrol agent investigating immigration issues near the border made this a new case outside the recognized cause of action or whether the case entailed ordinary domestic law-enforcement activities that happened to occur near the border, bringing it within the Bivens `heartland.'” (bold added). Mike LaSusa for Law360 observed that the “justices appeared reluctant . . . to give wider latitude for individuals to sue border agents for damages over alleged constitutional violations, questioning whether such suits could negatively impact national security.”
KJ
Posted in: