Goldey v. Fields
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Goldey v. Fields and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Goldey v. Fields.
The Supreme Court addressed whether a Bivens remedy extends to Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims against federal prison officials. The Fourth Circuit had allowed Fields to proceed with his claim, but the Supreme Court reversed this decision. The Court emphasized that extending Bivens to new contexts, such as this one, is not warranted due to existing alternative remedies and potential impacts on prison operations.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Goldey v. Fields.
The Court held that Bivens does not extend to allow an Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim for damages against federal prison officials.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Goldey v. Fields. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Cruel and Unusual Punishment is relevant to Goldey v. Fields
The case involves an Eighth Amendment claim regarding excessive force, which is central to the Court's decision.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Fields sued the Bureau of Prisons and prison officials for damages, claiming excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
-
Why Remedies and Relief is relevant to Goldey v. Fields
The Court's decision focuses on whether a Bivens remedy is available for Eighth Amendment violations, which directly pertains to the scope of judicial remedies.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Bivens does not extend to allow an Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim for damages against federal prison officials.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Goldey v. Fields
The Court exercises its power to review and potentially extend Bivens remedies, an aspect of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)For 45 years, this Court has consistently declined to extend Bivens to new contexts.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Goldey v. Fields that support the summary and concepts above.
Bivens does not extend to allow an Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim for damages against federal prison offcials.
This case arises in a new context, and special factors counsel against recognizing an implied Bivens cause of action for Eighth Amendment excessive-force violations.
Congress has actively legislated in prisoner litigation but has not enacted a statutory cause of action for money damages.
