Monday audio. RPI Papers due tomorrow. Outside if the rain holds off.
We will continue with and should finish Bivens, so be ready to work through the three Puzzles.
• What would congressional action look like?
• What is the "double-counting" objection to the Court's two-step approach?
• What is the argument that Bivens is dead rhetorically if not legally? And what is the argument for killing it altogether (Amir's question, off the Gorsuch dissent in Egbert)?
• Go back to the Doe v. Google puzzle in Chapter 2 (p. 50). That claim was based on action by federal officials. How does the case get resolved if plaintiffs seek damages as opposed to an injunction?
I think we are only going to get through Overview for Immunity, so don't move on to Legislative Immunity.
• What are the purposes and policies behind immunity of all kinds?
• What are the purposes of § 1983/Bivens litigation, especially for damages?
• What makes immunity "absolute," as opposed to qualified?
