One of the oldest federal civil rights statutes in America authorizes the recovery of damages from a state official who has violated the “Constitutional” rights of the plaintiff. 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. In Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, decided on June 20, 2024, the Court ruled 6-3 that a lawsuit under Section 1983 for a significantly harmful “malicious prosecution” should not be dismissed solely because the defendants had “probable cause” to arrest, seize and confine the plaintiff only for other, relatively minor charges. The Court explained that an official’s lack of “probable cause” was an essential element of every “malicious prosecution” claim against the official, and therefore the official’s “probable cause” for prosecution of only some of the crimes with which he or she charged the plaintiff does not justify the dismissal of the plaintiff’s entire “malicious prosecution” lawsuit. The three dissenting Justices, Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch complained that the Court was recognizing a Constitutional right against “malicious prosecution” that did not exist.
Comment: Justices Thomas and Alito, at least, were absolutely correct. There is absolutely no textual basis in the United States Constitution for a “Constitutional” right against “malicious prosecution.”[1] The older Supreme Court precedent on which this federal “malicious prosecution” case was based,[2] should be overruled for that precise reason.
Dan Rhea
[1] Most states recognize a “common law” right under state law against a “malicious prosecution.”
[2] See Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. 36 (2022)
RECENT RULINGS 