Camreta v. Greene
| Camreta v. Greene | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued March 1, 2011 Decided May 26, 2011 | |
| Full case name | Bob Camreta v. Sarah Greene, personally and as next friend of S.G., a minor, and K.G., a minor; James Alford, Deputy Sheriff, Deschutes County, Oregon v. Sarah Greene, personally and as next friend of S.G., a minor |
| Docket no. | 09-1454 |
| Citations | 563 U.S. 692 (more) 131 S. Ct. 2020; 179 L. Ed. 2d 1118; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4016 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Greene v. Camreta, No. 6:05-cv-06047 (D. Or. Mar. 23, 2006), affirmed in part, reversed in part, 588 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 562 U.S. 960 (2010). |
| Subsequent | On remand, 661 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2011). |
| Holding | |
| In the general case the Court may review a lower court's constitutional ruling at the behest of government officials who have won final judgment on qualified immunity grounds but could not for this case due to details specific to it. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kagan, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Ginsburg, Alito |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Concurrence | Sotomayor, joined by Breyer |
| Dissent | Kennedy, joined by Thomas |
Camreta v. Greene, 563 U.S. 692 (2011), was a case of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the appealability cases resolved on immunity grounds.
In the underlying action, the Ninth Circuit had ruled that government officials had performed an unconstitutional seizure on a schoolchild, but the doctrine of qualified immunity protected the officials from a civil suit over the conduct. Consequently, the officials had formally won their suit. Although statute authorized the Supreme Court to accept appeals from any party, the Court had long eschewed appeals from prevailing parties, in part because such appeals typically regarded dicta. It was thus unclear whether the government officials could appeal and challenge the Ninth Circuit's ruling that the underlying seizure was unconstitutional.[1]
In Camreta v. Greene, the Supreme Court held that government officials could appeal the underlying constitutional ruling in a case decided on qualified immunity grounds. Per the opinion of the court, the underlying constitutional rulings had substantial prospective effect, determining whether the challenged conduct might recur. Thus they were not dicta.[1]
However, the Court also found that government officials could not appeal this particular case. The child's guardian no longer had any incentive to defend their side of the judgement. Although the officials might perform similar conduct in the future, the schoolchild was now of approximately graduating age, and thus unlikely to be the subject of any future seizure. As the underlying dispute had become moot, the Ninth Circuit's opinion was vacated per Munsingwear.[1]
The case also had two concurring opinions and one dissenting opinion. Justice Sotomayor's concurring opinion argued that, as mootness was sufficient to decide the case, the court should not have reached the appealability question. Justice Scalia's concurring opinion suggested future reconsideration of the common practice of ruling on underlying issues before granting qualified immunity. And Justice Kennedy dissented that the appeal should be allowed, even when "it does seem that clarification is required" for an underlying constitutional ruling.[1]
See also
References
Further reading
- Kerr, Orin S. (2011). "Fourth Amendment Remedies and Development of the Law: A Comment on Camreta v. Greene and Davis v. United States". GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 581. SSRN 1918991.
- Kirkpatrick, Michael T.; Matz, Joshua (2011). "Avoiding Permanent Limbo: Qualified Immunity and the Elaboration of Constitutional Rights from Saucier to Camreta (and Beyond)". Fordham Law Review. 80 (2): 643.
- Kinports, Kit (2012). "Camreta and Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment, and Witnesses". Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 102 (2): 283–328. JSTOR 23415236. SSRN 1959713.
External links
- Text of Camreta v. Greene, 563 U.S. 692 (2011) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)