Law professors submit amicus curiae brief before U.S. Supreme Court in important constitutional and qualified-immunity case

Client(s) Group of legal scholars

Jones Day, serving as pro bono counsel to a group of legal scholars, filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in an important constitutional and qualified-immunity case. The plaintiffs claim that a U.S. border agent violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments by shooting their son, a non-U.S.-citizen who was in Mexico at the time, without any justification. The brief, filed in support of the plaintiffs (petitioners), addresses whether the border agent is protected from suit by qualified immunity. It argues that, contrary to the holding of the court below, the availability of qualified immunity depends upon only the facts known to officers when they act. The brief concludes that, because it was clearly unconstitutional for the border agent to shoot the plaintiffs' son on the facts he knew at the time, the agent is not entitled to qualified immunity.

Hernández v. Mesa, No. 15-118 (U.S.)