A convicted criminal with support from politically conservative organizations has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to “put an end” to the judicial practice of enhancing criminal penalties based on jury-acquitted conduct.

To establish the “ultimate discovery” exception to the exclusionary rule, the government must prove the exception by a “preponderance of the evidence,” the Eleventh Circuit recently held in an en banc decision. The full-court decision reversed forty-one years of Circuit precedent.

Whether law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity when they knowingly violated their training by retaliating against a person for filming an arrest the officers made in public, was submitted this month for the U.S. Supreme Court’s consideration.

Using three pole cameras mounted on public property to continuously monitor the exterior of a defendant’s home for 18 months without a warrant is not an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment, according to the Seventh Circuit.

Law enforcement cannot place a resisting person in a prone position regardless of other factors, the Supreme Court held this week. “Such a per se rule would contravene the careful, context-specific analysis” the Court requires.

“Community caretaking” does not create a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home, a unanimous Supreme Court recently held.

An officer who held his gun to a suspect’s head, while using the suspect as a “human shield,” was entitled to qualified immunity because the officer’s conduct did not violate clearly established law, the Seventh Circuit recently held.

The Supreme Court last week heard oral argument on whether the “community caretaking” exception allows law enforcement to enter a home for the purposes of the occupant’s health and safety.

When a district court addresses the merits of a Federal Tort Claims Act claim in its decision dismissing that claim for failing to legally state a claim, the FTCA bars the plaintiffs from bringing any Bivens claim on the same subject matter, the Supreme Court held today.

On-camera participation in a password-protected Zoom videoconference may be relied upon as evidence of a conspiracy, the Third Circuit recently held. In that same decision, the Court held Zoom user logs are “classic business records” that may be introduced into evidence.

Government officials may be sued in their personal capacity for alleged violations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), the Supreme Court held in the case of Tanzin v. Tanvir, issued last week.

The MSPB cannot consider an agency’s interpretation or presentation of evidence to decide whether an individual-right-of-action presents a non-frivolous allegation of whistleblower reprisal, the Federal Circuit clarified in a recent holding.

Temporarily removing a package from mail processing to examine its exterior does not constitute a Fourth Amendment seizure, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held.

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether pursuit of a person who a police officer has probable cause to believe has committed a misdemeanor allows the officer to enter a home without a warrant.

Where an agency relies, directly or indirectly, on the results of a psychological assessment in justifying an employee’s removal, the agency must provide the employee with a meaningful opportunity to review and challenge the evidence underlying the assessment, the Federal Circuit recently held.

Thousands of Oklahoma convictions of Creek Nation members on reservation land may be dismissed following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma. In that case, the Supreme Court held that only the tribes and federal government may prosecute Native Americans living in most of Eastern Oklahoma for crimes committed there. This holding may be extended to dismiss potentially thousands of state convictions for retrial by either tribal governments or the U.S. Department of Justice.

FEDagent recently reported the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Babb v. Wilkie. In Babb, the Supreme Court reversed a panel of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and held the prohibition against age discrimination in the federal workplace was broader than that applied in the private sector. We update you now that plaintiff Noris Babb is requesting the full Eleventh Circuit to apply the Supreme Court’s holding to lower the bar to establish EEO reprisal claims in the federal workplace.

Whether an unsuccessful attempt to detain a suspect by use of physical force is a “seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, in a case where officers shot a suspect who temporarily eluded capture and subsequently sued for civil damages, is set to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in its Fall Term.

Officers who tased a plaintiff up to eight times where the plaintiff acted violently and uncooperatively, even after being handcuffed, were entitled to qualified immunity in §1983 action, the Eighth Circuit this week held.

A warrant authorizing a search of property and the seizure of a vehicle implicitly included a search of the property for police to seize the vehicle’s keys, the Eighth Circuit recently held.