Saucier v. Katz
| Saucier v. Katz | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 20, 2001 Decided June 18, 2001 | |
| Full case name | Donald Saucier, Petitioner v. Elliot M. Katz and In Defense Of Animals |
| Citations | 533 U.S. 194 (more) 121 S. Ct. 2151; 150 L. Ed. 2d 272; 2001 U.S. LEXIS 4664; 69 U.S.L.W. 4481; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5000; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 6137; 2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 3134; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 361 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| A qualified immunity ruling requires an analysis that is not susceptible to fusion with the question of whether unreasonable force was used in making the arrest. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Thomas, and Souter (Parts I and II) |
| Concurrence | Ginsburg (in judgment), joined by Stevens, Breyer |
| Concur/dissent | Souter |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. IV | |
Overruled by | |
| Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) | |
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered the qualified immunity of a police officer to a civil rights case brought through a Bivens action.