Supreme Court of the United States · 1983 · Federal Courts
Federal CourtsBivensfederal employmentconstitutional remediesFirst AmendmentBivensspecial factors counselling hesitationfederal personnel policy
Facts
Bush was an aerospace engineer employed by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and publicly criticized the agency while administrative appeals about his reassignments were pending. After those statements, adverse personnel proceedings were initiated, and he was demoted from GS-14 to GS-12, reducing his salary. Bush pursued civil service remedies, and the Civil Service Commission's Appeals Review Board ultimately concluded his speech was protected, recommended reinstatement, and he was restored to his former position with about $30,000 in backpay. While that administrative process was pending, he also sought damages from his superior for the alleged constitutional violation.
Issue
Whether the Supreme Court should authorize a new nonstatutory damages remedy directly under the Constitution for a federal employee who alleges that his superior violated his First Amendment rights through retaliatory demotion, despite the existence of comprehensive civil service remedies.
Rule
Although federal courts have power to recognize damages remedies for constitutional violations, they should not create a new Bivens-type remedy when Congress has established an elaborate and comprehensive remedial system governing the federal employment relationship and special factors counsel hesitation in supplementing that scheme, even if the statutory remedies are less than fully compensatory.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Elena Park, a wildlife biologist employed by a federal agency in Boise, publicly criticized her division's habitat reports. Her supervisor demoted her, but after using the agency's administrative appeal system she won reinstatement, retroactive seniority, and full backpay. She then sues the supervisor personally in federal court for damages under the First Amendment, seeking compensation for emotional distress.
Should the court recognize the requested constitutional damages remedy?
Explanation. The majority held that federal courts have power to recognize constitutional damages remedies, but should not create a new one when the claim arises out of the federal employment relationship and Congress has established an elaborate remedial system that provides meaningful remedies. That remains true even if the statutory remedies are less effective than personal damages and do not fully compensate all injuries, such as emotional distress.