Reichle v. Howards
- Decided
- June 4, 2012
- Docket
- 11-262
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,745 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that there is no “specific right to be free from a retaliatory arrest that is otherwise supported by probable cause” — Abeyta v. City of New York (2014)
- holding that as of 2006, “it was not clearly established that an arrest supported by probable cause could give rise to a First Amendment violation” — Baer v. Leach (2015)
- concluding that officers were entitled to qualified immunity after considering only the “clearly established” prong of that analysis — Johnson v. Wichita, Kansas, City of (2024)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case requires us to decide whether two federal law enforcement agents are immune from suit for allegedly arresting a suspect in retaliation for his political speech, when the agents had probable cause to arrest the suspect for committing a federal crime.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658 (2012)Read the full opinion
Free account needed
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.