Bivens Claims For Prisoners and Detainees After Ziglar v. Abbasi

In Ziglar v. Abbasi (2017), the Supreme Court created new hurdles for federal prisoners or detainees seeking damages against federal actors who have violated the Constitution. Since that decision, the lower courts have been deeply divided on the availability of the so-called "Bivens remedy" for common prisoner claims, including claims of abuse by guards, inhumane conditions of confinement, and retaliation. In this program, Rachel Meeropol of the Center for Constitutional Rights will discuss the current state of the law, including when a claim presents a "new context," and how lower courts are applying the Supreme Court's "special factors" inquiry.

This program will benefit civil rights and criminal defense attorneys.  

1. Analyze the Supreme Court's The decision in Ziglar v. Abbasi
2. Identify which prisoner claims have the best chance of success under current precedent
3. Explore potential arguments to avoid common Bivens pitfalls