Published 56 minutes ago • loading... • Updated 4 hours ago
Supreme Court appears wary of former inmate’s quest for damages over prison medical care
Justices weighed whether to narrow or end Bivens, a precedent lawyers say is one of the few ways to seek damages from federal officers.
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Nielsen v. Watanabe, examining whether citizens can sue federal law enforcement officers for damages when constitutional rights are violated.
Kekai Watanabe alleges that prison nurse Francis Nielsen violated his Eighth Amendment rights by refusing medical care after a 2021 gang riot at the Federal Detention Center in Honolulu.
The lawsuit challenges the 1971 Bivens decision, which created a path to sue federal officers for constitutional violations. Attorneys for Nielsen argue the precedent is now obsolete.
Chief Justice John Roberts appeared open to a narrower ruling during Monday's arguments, questioning why the court should not defer to the government's "cautious, incremental" approach.
Experts warn that eliminating Bivens could grant federal officers absolute immunity. With the Accountability for Federal Law Enforcement Act stalled, a decision is expected by June 2027.