42 U.S.C. § 1983
Citation
42 U.S.C. § 1983 — Civil Rights Act of 1871, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act. Originally enacted to provide a federal remedy against state officials who deprived freedmen of constitutional rights.
Statutory Text (Key Portion)
“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.”
Elements
- A person
- Acting under color of state law
- Deprivation of a right secured by the federal Constitution or federal statutes
”Under Color of State Law”
Includes state, county, and local government officials acting in their official capacity or purporting to exercise governmental authority. Private parties may qualify when:
- Joint action with state actors
- Public function — performing a function traditionally exclusively reserved to the state
- Nexus/symbiosis — state is so entangled with private actor that the action is fairly attributable to the state
Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co. (1982): two-part test — (1) the deprivation must be caused by the exercise of a right or privilege created by the state or a rule of conduct imposed by the state; (2) the party charged must be a state actor or one whose conduct is “fairly attributable” to the state.
”Person” — Who Can Be Sued
| Defendant | Status |
|---|---|
| Individual state/local officers | Yes — “persons” under § 1983 |
| Municipalities and local governments | Yes — Monell v. Dept. of Social Services (1978) |
| States (and state agencies) | No — 11th Amendment bar; Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police (1989) |
| Federal officers | No — use Bivens action instead |
Monell Municipal Liability
Monell v. Department of Social Services (1978): municipalities are “persons” subject to § 1983 but respondeat superior does not apply. A municipality is liable only when:
- An official policy or custom of the municipality
- Caused the constitutional deprivation
Three routes to establish policy or custom:
- A decision by a final policymaker
- A widespread custom or practice that, though not authorized by law, is so persistent as to constitute a custom
- A failure to train with deliberate indifference to known or obvious constitutional violations (City of Canton v. Harris)
Individual Liability and Qualified Immunity
Officers sued in their individual capacity may invoke qualified immunity.
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982): officers are shielded from liability unless their conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right that a reasonable person would have known. Subjective good faith is irrelevant — purely objective standard.
- Saucier v. Katz (2001): two-prong sequential inquiry — (1) did the officer violate a constitutional right? (2) was that right clearly established?
- Pearson v. Callahan (2009): courts may address the two Saucier prongs in either order; no longer mandatory to decide the constitutional question first.
- “Clearly established” standard: the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would understand the specific conduct is unlawful.
Absolute Immunity
Certain categories of officials receive absolute immunity from § 1983 damages regardless of their state of mind:
- Judges: judicial acts within jurisdiction (Stump v. Sparkman)
- Prosecutors: acts in their prosecutorial capacity (Imbler v. Pachtman); investigative and administrative functions receive only qualified immunity
- Legislators: legislative acts (Tenney v. Brandhove)
- Witnesses: testimony at trial
Damages
| Type | Rule |
|---|---|
| Compensatory | Available for actual injury |
| Punitive | Against individual defendants who acted with malice or reckless indifference (Smith v. Wade); not against municipalities |
| Nominal | Available even without proven actual damages when constitutional right violated (Carey v. Piphus) |
| Attorney’s fees | Available to prevailing plaintiffs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 |
Bivens Actions
For federal officers (not subject to § 1983), the Supreme Court recognized an implied damages action in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971). Subsequent decisions have drastically curtailed Bivens:
- Ziglar v. Abbasi (2017): extending Bivens to new contexts is disfavored; courts should decline to imply a remedy in any new context absent special factors. Bivens remains available in its original Fourth Amendment search-and-seizure context but rarely beyond.