Narrative Opinion Summary
Certiorari was granted by the 11th Circuit, with the order amended to limit the review to two specific questions. First, the court will consider whether state officials sued in their individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are entitled to qualified immunity unless they have violated rights that are 'clearly established' by precedent involving 'materially similar' facts. Second, the court will examine whether, under assumed true circumstances at the summary judgment stage, the act of tying a prisoner to a 'hitching post' constitutes a violation of 'clearly established' constitutional rights relevant to qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Legal Issues Addressed
Constitutional Violation and Qualified Immunitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court examines if the act of tying a prisoner to a 'hitching post' at the summary judgment stage constitutes a violation of clearly established constitutional rights, affecting the applicability of qualified immunity.
Reasoning: Second, the court will examine whether, under assumed true circumstances at the summary judgment stage, the act of tying a prisoner to a 'hitching post' constitutes a violation of 'clearly established' constitutional rights relevant to qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Qualified Immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court is tasked with determining whether state officials, when sued in their individual capacities, can claim qualified immunity unless they have violated rights that are clearly established by precedent with materially similar facts.
Reasoning: First, the court will consider whether state officials sued in their individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are entitled to qualified immunity unless they have violated rights that are 'clearly established' by precedent involving 'materially similar' facts.