October Term 2009 · Docket 08-1529
Does Section 233 bar Bivens claims against Public Health Service officers?
the sides that brought the case seek to dismiss constitutional tort claims. the opposing sides argue the statute does not abrogate these rights.
Verified source milestones
- — 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.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ms. Goldenberg argued the Tort Claims Act sets a ceiling based on local law.
Mr. Shah asserted Section 233 precludes civil actions against officers performing medical duties.
Mr. Doyle contended Section 233 does not satisfy the explicit declaration test for abrogation.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 7-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a federal statute blocks constitutional tort claims against Public Health Service officers.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 2, 2010.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to dismiss the constitutional tort claims against their officers.
the opposing sides want the Court to allow the constitutional tort claims to proceed against the officers.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue Section 233 precludes civil actions arising from medical duties by its plain terms.
the opposing sides argue Section 233 fails the explicit declaration test required to abrogate constitutional rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked how the Court determines Congress's intent regarding Bivens immunity.
Justice Scalia asked whether the Court should analyze the statute's text rather than congressional knowledge.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 7-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of federal officer immunity in constitutional tort cases. It determines whether specific statutes block these legal remedies.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
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 Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 7-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 41-21 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 41-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-13
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.