Facts
- Carlos Rivera Gómez was a police agent in Puerto Rico’s Bureau of Criminal Investigation.
- In 1975, he gave a sworn statement asserting that two other agents had offered false evidence for use in a criminal case.
- After the statement, he was transferred away from investigative duties; an internal investigation later confirmed his allegations.
- In 1976, he testified as a defense witness that the other agents had provided false evidence.
- He was then criminally charged based on information supplied by the Superintendent of Police, suspended, and discharged without a hearing.
- The criminal case and subsequent administrative proceedings ultimately favored Gómez; an administrative commission ordered reinstatement with back pay.
- Gómez filed a damages action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Superintendent in his official capacity, alleging discharge without procedural due process that injured his employment-related interests and reputation.
Issues
- In a § 1983 action against a public official who may assert qualified immunity, must the plaintiff plead that the official acted in bad faith to state a claim?
- Alternatively, is good faith (qualified immunity) an affirmative defense that the defendant must plead?
Decision
- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed and remanded.
- The Court held that a § 1983 plaintiff is not required to allege bad faith to state a claim.
- The Court held that qualified immunity (good faith) is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded by the defendant official.
- The Court limited its holding to the burden of pleading and did not decide the allocation of the burden of persuasion at later stages.
Legal Principles
- A complaint states a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by alleging only: (1) deprivation of a federal right, and (2) action under color of state or territorial law.
- Qualified immunity is not an element of a § 1983 claim; it is an affirmative defense.
- Under federal pleading rules, a plaintiff generally need not anticipate and negate affirmative defenses in the complaint.
- The allocation of the pleading burden is supported where immunity turns on facts largely within the defendant’s knowledge and control, including objective reasonableness and potentially subjective good faith.
Conclusion
The Court held that § 1983 requires only allegations of a federal-right deprivation and action under color of law; plaintiffs need not plead bad faith, and defendant officials must raise qualified immunity as an affirmative defense.