Supreme Court to review inmate lawsuit over untreated prison riot injury 

WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court took up an appeal on Monday from a nurse facing a $3 million lawsuit over failing to provide medical care to an inmate, agreeing to review a key precedent allowing lawsuits against federal officers for constitutional violations.

Francis Nielsen, who worked at a federal prison in Honolulu, says a lower court incorrectly allowed the case to move forward by expanding precedents concerning when federal prison inmates can sue officials for deliberate indifference to their medical needs.

In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that inmates had a cause of action to bring lawsuits under the Eighth Amendment, which protects against cruel and unusual punishment, in Carlson v. Green. The ruling marked a rare circumstance where the justices expanded on the rights to sue federal officials under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents.

The high court strictly curtailed so-called Bivens actions in recent decades, making it increasingly hard to remedy offenses by federal agents. Nielsen’s case asks about the scope of Carlson, but the justices could decide to strike a death blow to Bivens at the same time.

“Preserving what remains of Bivens does little good,” Nielsen wrote. “Bivens is now little more than a ‘zombie.’ It offers only ‘false hope … invit[ing] still more ‘protracted litigation destined to yield nothing.’ And it disserves the interests of civil rights and ‘the public writ large because, absent [Bivens’] formal abrogation, Congress has no incentive to legislate in the space.’”

Kekai Watanabe sued Nielsen after being assaulted during a gang-related fight while in custody at Honolulu’s Federal Detention Center in 2021. Watanabe says he repeatedly requested treatment for severe injuries sustained in the brawl but was only given over-the-counter medication for his pain.

Months later, an X-ray revealed that Watanabe suffered a fractured coccyx in the attack. And the scans showed that bone chips had migrated to surrounding soft tissue areas. Officials referred Watanabe for outside medical treatment, but he didn’t receive any further care before he was discharged from custody in 2024.

A lower court initially dismissed Watanabe’s lawsuit, but the Ninth Circuit reversed under Carlson.

Watanabe cautioned the court against reviewing Nielson’s appeal, arguing the panel’s decision fell under the existing precedential limits.

“In reality, petitioner’s disagreement is not with the decision below, but with Carlson — and, ultimately, with Bivens,” Watanabe wrote.

The high court’s review of the precedents comes as several states explore options for holding ICE officers accountable for injuring and killing individuals during the Trump administration’s immigration purge.

The Supreme Court will review Nielson’s case during its next term beginning in the fall.

Follow @KelseyReichmann Follow @kelseyreichmann.bsky.social