Abstract
In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics,t the Supreme Court held that a cause of action for damages against federal law enforcement officers who violate the fourth amendment could be inferred directly from constitutional provisions. Through analysis of the reasoning which necessarily underlies such a holding, the author draws several general conclusions about the respective roles of the Court and Congress in creating and restricting remedies effectuating constitutional guarantees. He then applies his analysis to the possibilities for independent judicial creation of an action against governmental units and for legislative replacement of the exclusionary rule with compensatory remedies against the fisc.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
