SCOTUS to consider implied right to sue in case of Mexican boy shot and killed by US border guard
Image from Shutterstock.com.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to consider once again whether the family of a Mexican teen has an implied right to sue in U.S. courts for his fatal cross-border shooting by a U.S. Border Patrol agent.
The high court granted cert in the case of Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca, who was 15 when he was shot and killed in June 2010 by an agent on the Texas side of the border. The Supreme Court had returned the case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans for further review in 2017.
In the Texas case, the U.S. Border Patrol had said Hernandez was throwing rocks to distract agents from an immigrant smuggling operation. The family’s lawyer said he was playing a game with friends in which they dared each other to run up a culvert incline, touch the border fence, then run back to the bottom of the culvert.
The Supreme Court agreed to consider the first issue in the cert petition, which asks whether federal courts should recognize a Bivens claim for damages for alleged violations of the teen’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. A Bivens remedy is named for a case that found an implied right of action to sue federal officials who violate the constitutional ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Supreme Court “has grown increasingly uneasy” with the Bivens decision, “and it has cautioned that the decision should not lightly be extended to new contexts,” the New York Times reported last summer in a story on the conflicting 5th and 9th Circuit rulings. “The Supreme Court itself has extended the Bivens decision only twice, most recently 38 years ago,” the New York Times reported.
ABAJournal.com: “Court to decide whether Constitution grants protections to Mexican boy killed by US border guard”
ABAJournal.com: “Supreme Court to consider suit over border agent’s shooting of teen on Mexican side of the border”