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 Timothy T. Coates (Petitioners), petitioners argue that the Ninth Circuit’s exception to absolute prosecutorial immunity for chief and supervising advocates conflicts with the Supreme Court’s precedent in Imbler v. Pachtman and its progeny.
According to Mr. Coates, petitioners contend that the constitutional claim at issue concerns violations of the Giglio and Brady disclosure obligations.
According to Mr. Coates, petitioners assert that negligence in maintaining an administrative data system can cause constitutional violations, and that the presence of such a system could have prevented the misconduct at trial.
According to Respondent, respondents argue that extending liability to supervisory prosecutors would expose them to suits and create anomalies that do not affect line prosecutors.
According to Respondent, respondents maintain that the case does not concern whether a chief district attorney can set trial‑strategy policies, and that granting immunity to the chief DA would not affect the outcome.
Background and question before the Court
According to Timothy T. Coates (Petitioners), the case arises from a Ninth Circuit opinion that creates an exception to absolute prosecutorial immunity for chief advocates and supervising advocates.
Justice Kennedy asked whether Imbler required tactical, on‑the‑spot decisions, contrasting that requirement with the long‑term policy at issue in this case.
What each side argues
Petitioner Position
According to Timothy T. Coates (Petitioners), petitioners argue that the Ninth Circuit’s exception to absolute prosecutorial immunity for chief and supervising advocates conflicts with Imbler v. Pachtman and its progeny.
According to Mr. Coates, petitioners assert that the constitutional claim concerns violations of the Giglio and Brady disclosure obligations.
According to Mr. Coates, petitioners argue that negligence in maintaining an administrative data system can cause constitutional violations, and that the presence of such a system could have prevented the misconduct at trial.
According to Mr. Rosenkranz, mr. Rosenkranz explains that the line between a prosecutor creating charging documents and a supervisory function is a fine distinction, citing the Kalina case.
According to Mr. Rosenkranz, mr. Rosenkranz cites an example where a district attorney’s decision not to purchase statutory supplements led line prosecutors to charge under incorrect statutes, describing this as a supervisory (commissary) function.
Respondent Position
According to Respondent, respondents argue that exposing supervisory prosecutors to suits would create anomalies that do not affect line prosecutors.
According to Respondent, respondents state that the case is not about whether a chief district attorney can set trial‑strategy policies, and that granting immunity to the chief DA would not affect the case.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Kennedy asked whether Imbler required tactical, on‑the‑spot decisions, contrasting that with the long‑term policy at issue.
Justice Ginsburg asked what year the prosecution occurred and noted that the case was creating a database.
According to Justice Alito, justice Alito questioned whether the petitioners’ theory applied to any system of data dissemination.
Justice Alito followed up, asking whether a prosecutor’s policy of not distributing recent Ninth Circuit or Supreme Court decisions on criminal constitutional procedure would be a valid theory.
Justice Ginsburg asked whether, if the petitioners are correct, every district attorney would be required to maintain a shared data bank of informants and other information.
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.
- f4fb5382d4d5c714e327-r1-6ab8ec21006ec857.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 22, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.