Clearly established means that, at the time of the [official’s] conduct, the law was ‘“sufficiently clear” that every “reasonable official would understand that what he is doing”’ is unlawful.” Id. (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 741 (2011)). Thus, “[i]t is not enough that the rule is suggested by then-existing precedent.” Id. Instead, “[t]he precedent must be clear enough that every reasonable official would interpret it to establish the particular rule the plaintiff seeks to apply.” Id. “In other
Clearly established means that, at the time of the officer’s conduct, the law was sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would understand that what he is doing is unlawful.” Wesby, 138 S. Ct. at 590 (internal quotation and citations omitted). “In other words, existing law must have placed the constitutionality of the officer’s conduct beyond debate. This demanding standard protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Id. (internal quotations and citations omitted). In the context of a false arrest claim, “[e]ven if, in hindsight, it appears that probable cause was lacking, qualified immunity is still available if the arresting officers reasonably could have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the arresting officers possessed. This is often called arguable probable cause.” Hurt, 880 F.3d at 841.
Clearly established means that, at the time of the officer’s conduct, the law was “ ‘suffi- ciently clear’ that every ‘reasonable office[er] would understand that what he is doing’ ” is unlawful. In other words, existing law must have placed the constitutionality of the of- ficer’s conduct “beyond debate.” This demand- ing standard protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” To be clearly established, a legal principle must have a sufficiently clear foun- dation in then-existing precedent. The rule must be ‘settled law,’ which means it is dic- tated by “controlling authority” or “a robust ‘consensus of cases of persuasive authority[.]’ ”
Examples of Clearly established in a sentence
Clearly established performance levels (correlated to the Evaluation of Student Progress) for competencies, tasks, assigned projects, and/or activities.
Clearly established rules must be taught to students, reinforced frequently, and enforced consistently by all administration, faculty, and staff.
Clearly established federal law is found in holdings, not dicta, of the Supreme Court at the time of the state court decision.
Clearly established performance levels (standards of proficiency or passing scores) for competencies, tasks, assigned projects, and/or units of study;e.
Clearly established command relationships are crucial for ensuring timely and effective employment of cyberspace capabilities.
More Definitions of Clearly established
Clearly established means that, at the time of the officer's conduct, the law was sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would understand that what he is doing is unlawful.” Dist. of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577, 589 (2018)(quotation omitted). “[E]xisting law must have placed the constitutionality of the officer's conduct beyond debate.” Id. (quotation omitted). “This demanding standard protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Id. (quotation omitted). The Supreme Court has “repeatedly stressed that courts must not define clearly established law at a high level of generality, since doing so avoids the crucial question whether the official acted reasonably in the particular circumstances that he or she faced.” Id. at 590 (quotation omitted).
Clearly established means that the state courts have more “leeway” as to what is an
Clearly established the court found, means whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct is unlawful under the circumstances. The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that a right is clearly established. Here, Doe failed to identify any factually similar case that would have provided a reasonable officer with notice that he had a constitutional duty to protect her in the situation Officer Del Boccio encountered upon arrival. Id.
Clearly established means that, at the time of the officer’s con- duct, the law was sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would understand that what he is doing is unlawful. The Supreme Court has held that ‘where the officer has prob- able cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to oth- ers, it is not constitutionally unrea-
Clearly established means that, when the officers took the action that is the subject of the lawsuit, the law was “sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would understand that what he is doing is unlawful.” Wesby, supra, 138 S. Ct. at 589 (internal quotation marks omitted). Existing law must have placed the
Clearly established means that existing precedent “placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate” at the time of the alleged violation. Id. Plaintiff must show that “every reasonable official would understand” that his actions violated a given right. Id. Crucially, a plaintiff cannot succeed by identifying clearly established law “at a high level of generality” not “particularized” to the facts of his case. White v. Pauly, 137 S. Ct. 548, 552 (2017). Particularity becomes even more significant in the Fourth Amendment context, where the Supreme Court has recognized that officers often struggle “to determine how the relevant legal doctrine” applies to “the factual situation” they confront. Mullenix v. Luna, 136 S. Ct. 305, 308 (2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Clearly established means that, at the time of the officer’s conduct, the law was ‘sufficiently clear’ that every ‘reasonable official would understand that what he is doing’ is unlawful.” District of Columbia v. Wesby, U.S. , , 138 S. Ct. 577, 589, 199 L. Ed. 2d 453 (2018) (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731,