October Term 2010 · Docket 10-98
Does a prosecutor hold absolute immunity for a material witness arrest?
The dispute centers on whether a prosecutor can be sued for arresting a witness without probable cause.
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
General Katyal argued the arrest serves a core prosecutorial purpose.
Mr. Gelernt cited the Fourth Amendment requirement for probable cause.
justice_questions
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 41-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 9-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of prosecutorial immunity. the side that brought the case seeks absolute protection from civil suits. the opposing side argues qualified immunity applies instead.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 2, 2011.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants absolute immunity from civil liability for the arrest.
the opposing side wants qualified immunity to apply to the arrest.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the arrest is a core prosecutorial function.
the opposing side argues the arrest is not a core prosecutorial function.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if the statute changes the immunity analysis.
Justice Breyer asked about a prosecutor's intent to misuse the process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 41-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 9-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-41
Why it matters
This case defines the boundary of prosecutorial power. It determines when officials face personal liability for arrests. It balances public safety against individual rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
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 41-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 9-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-41
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 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-23 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-45
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.