Davis v. Passman
Citation and Court
442 U.S. 228 (1979) — Supreme Court of the United States
Facts
Shirley Davis was a deputy administrative assistant to Congressman Otto Passman. Passman fired her, stating in a letter that he needed a man for the job. Davis sued Passman directly under the Fifth Amendment for sex discrimination, seeking damages. There was no statutory cause of action covering congressional employees at the time.
Issue
Whether a federal employee may bring a Bivens-style damages action directly under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause for sex discrimination by a Member of Congress.
Holding
Yes. The Fifth Amendment’s due process guarantee of equal protection implies a private right of action for damages against a federal official who engages in sex discrimination, even a Member of Congress.
Rule / Doctrine
Bivens remedy extends to Fifth Amendment equal protection (sex discrimination) claims against federal officials. Where no adequate alternative remedy exists and no special factors counsel hesitation, the Court will imply a damages action directly from the Constitution.
Significance
Davis v. Passman is one of three canonical Bivens cases, extending the doctrine to the Fifth Amendment context and confirming that Bivens is not limited to Fourth Amendment claims. It also illustrates the limits of congressional self-dealing in immunity claims: even legislators are subject to constitutional damages suits for their employment decisions (though the Speech or Debate Clause may limit discovery).