Burnett v. Smith & Implied Rights of Action episode artwork

EPISODE · Jun 22, 2023 · 1H 1M

Burnett v. Smith & Implied Rights of Action

from FedSoc Forums · host The Federalist Society

If a federal agent violates a citizen’s constitutional rights, does a justiciable cause of action arise? If yes, do federal courts have the power to award damages for constitutional violations? These questions have been considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in cases like Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1971) and Egbert v. Boule (2022). Three state supreme courts have recently issued competing decisions on whether similar separation of powers concerns arise when state courts recognize rights under state constitutions.Burnett v. Smith, issued on May 5, 2023, was the latest of these three decisions. The case arose after the plaintiff, garbage truck driver Cory Burnett, was pulled over by Iowa Department of Transportation Officer Philip Smith for a cracked windshield. Burnett was eventually arrested by Officer Smith for interference with official acts (Iowa Code §719.1). The charges were ultimately dismissed following a trial. Later, Burnett sued Officer Smith for, among other things, an unreasonable seizure directly under the Iowa Constitution. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Iowa unanimously affirmed the district court’s judgment against Burnett and, in the process, held that courts in Iowa cannot imply remedies directly under the Iowa constitution, overruling Godfrey v. State (898 N.W.2d, 2017).In alignment with recent federal precedent, the court held that letting plaintiffs bring constitutional claims without the Iowa legislature first authorizing them “undermined the established allocation of responsibility between the legislative and the judicial branches of government.” This holding is at odds with decisions in Michigan (Bauserman v. Unemployment Insurance Agency) and Nevada (Mack v. Williams) where plaintiffs are allowed to sue without a legislative cause of action, provided certain conditions are met. Are state courts allowed to recognize remedies directly under their state constitutions? Or are they similarly constrained by separation of powers? In this recorded webinar discussion Anya Bidwell and Erin Hawley consider these questions and more.Featuring:--Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice--Erin Hawley, Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Jun 22, 2023

Embed this episode

NOW PLAYING

Burnett v. Smith & Implied Rights of Action

0:00 1:01:18

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of FedSoc Forums?

This episode is 1 hour and 1 minute long.

When was this FedSoc Forums episode published?

This episode was published on June 22, 2023.

Is there a transcript available for this episode?

Yes, a full transcript is available for this episode. You can read the complete transcript on the episode page.

Can I download this FedSoc Forums episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!