October Term 2008 · Docket 07-854

Does a chief prosecutor lose immunity for supervising a trial?

A district attorney claims absolute immunity. A plaintiff argues he should face a lawsuit for supervising a trial.

Official caption
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the side that brought the case argued the lower court created an improper exception to immunity.

    the opposing side argued chief prosecutors should not have absolute immunity for supervision.

    Justice Kennedy noted the difficulty of defining the specific violation in this context.

    Justice Stevens explored the boundary between prosecutorial and administrative functions.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests the scope of prosecutorial immunity. It asks if a chief prosecutor can be sued for supervising a trial.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 5, 2008.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the court to affirm absolute immunity for chief prosecutors.

the opposing side wants the court to allow a lawsuit against a chief prosecutor.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues chief prosecutors retain absolute immunity when supervising trials.

the opposing side argues chief prosecutors lose immunity when they supervise trial strategy.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kennedy asked how to identify a violation before determining qualified immunity.

Justice Stevens asked if a layperson performs a prosecutorial function in a hypothetical scenario.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the legal protection for senior prosecutors. It determines whether supervisors can be sued for trial decisions.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON