Disaggregating Constitutional Torts

41 Pages Posted: 6 Jun 2000

Date Written: May 2000

Abstract

In the four decades since Monroe v. Pape, the Supreme Court has crafted a vast body of law on money damages for violations of constitutional rights. This essay argues that Monroe was wrong. The error lay not in the result, which was admirable, but in the attribution of that result to a Reconstruction-era statute applicable indifferently to all rights. Treating the availability of damages as a transsubstantive exercise in statutory interpretation obscures important differences among rights and suppresses clear thinking about remedies. A better strategy would abandon "one-size-fits-all" and adapt remedies to specific kinds of constitutional violations. The availability of money damages would then depend on an assessment of their role in enforcing particular rights - and especially on the availability of alternative remedies that make damages more or less needful.

Suggested Citation

Jeffries, John C., Disaggregating Constitutional Torts (May 2000). UVA School of Law, Public Law Working Paper No. 00-4, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=224795 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.224795

John C. Jeffries (Contact Author)

University of Virginia School of Law ( email )

580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States
434-924-3436 (Phone)
434-924-7536 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
166
Abstract Views
1,272
Rank
324,079
PlumX Metrics