This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Petitioners (Garre), according to Petitioners (Garre), petitioners argue that there is no remedy under Bivens or an inferred action under the Just Compensation Clause.
According to Petitioners (Garre), according to Petitioners (Garre), petitioners assert that the conduct does not establish a constitutional tort or an actionable claim under RICO.
According to Mr. Garre, i think what is distinct about the Bivens claim here is first Bivens and Just Compensation Clause claims are fundamentally incompatible. And that in Bivens, its damages are nothing. Here the constitutional right actually explicitly provides a remedy, just compensation.
According to Mr. Garre, they don't have a Bivens remedy and they don't have a RICO remedy.
Background and question before the Court
What each side argues
Petitioners’ Position
According to Petitioners (Garre), we don't think that there is a remedy under Bivens or an inferred action under the Just Compensation Clause.
According to Petitioners (Garre), our position is that he hasn't established a constitutional tort or an actionable claim under RICO.
According to Mr. Garre, i think what is distinct about the Bivens claim here is first Bivens and Just Compensation Clause claims are fundamentally incompatible. And that in Bivens, its damages are nothing. Here the constitutional right actually explicitly provides a remedy, just compensation.
According to Mr. Garre, they don't have a Bivens remedy and they don't have a RICO remedy.
Respondent’s Position
According to Petitioners (Garre), respondent seeks recognition of a new constitutional tort under Bivens and the Just Compensation Clause.
According to Mr. Tribe, it is the retaliatory pattern that there is no remedy for.
What happened at oral argument
Laurence H. Tribe presented oral argument on behalf of the respondent.
Gregory C. Garre presented a rebuttal argument for the petitioners.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 8843ebcc6c29d432ca59-r1-bdd25bdc7683b5f9.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 22, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.