History
  • No items yet
midpage
606 U.S. 942
SCOTUS
2025
Read the full case

Background

  • Andrew Fields, a federal inmate at the U.S. Penitentiary in Lee County, Virginia, was placed in solitary confinement.
  • Fields alleged that during routine checks, prison officials physically abused him, constituting excessive force.
  • Fields sued the Bureau of Prisons and individual prison officials, seeking damages for alleged Eighth Amendment violations.
  • The District Court dismissed the complaint, holding there was no implied Bivens cause of action for excessive force under the Eighth Amendment.
  • The Fourth Circuit reversed, allowing the damages claim to proceed, finding no special factors against a Bivens remedy.
  • The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the Fourth Circuit.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Bivens allows a damages remedy for Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims against federal prison officials Fields argued that excessive force by federal officers violates his Eighth Amendment rights and warrants a damages remedy under Bivens. Goldey argued that Bivens has never been extended to Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims and that Congress has not authorized such a remedy. The Supreme Court held Bivens does not extend to permit an implied damages remedy for Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims against federal prison officials.

Key Cases Cited

  • Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (recognized implied damages action against federal officers for certain Fourth Amendment violations.)
  • Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017) (clarified limits on new Bivens extensions; courts must be cautious in creating new implied causes of action.)
  • Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14 (1980) (one of the few contexts where Bivens was extended beyond its original setting.)
  • Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. 482 (2022) (reaffirmed that creating remedies for constitutional violations is primarily a congressional function.)
  • Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61 (2001) (declined to extend Bivens to allow private entity liability.)
  • Davis v. Passman, 442 U.S. 228 (1979) (created a Bivens remedy in a Fifth Amendment context).
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Goldey v. Fields
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: Jun 30, 2025
Citations: 606 U.S. 942; 145 S.Ct. 2613; 24-809
Docket Number: 24-809
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
Log In
    Goldey v. Fields, 606 U.S. 942