Criminal Procedure

Hernandez v. Mesa — Study Notes

589 U.S. ___ (2020)

Study notes for Hernandez v. Mesa: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

The Bivens remedy does not extend to claims arising from U.S. Border Patrol shootings occurring on foreign soil.
Professor Notes

Hernandez v. Mesa raises critical questions surrounding the applicability of constitutional protections, such as the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, to non-citizens located outside of U.S. territory. Professors may emphasize how the Supreme Court's consideration of diplomatic relations and the implications for foreign policy guided their ruling. Additionally, the case highlights the limitations of the Bivens doctrine in extending remedies for constitutional violations, particularly when these acts involve complicated foreign relations or national security concerns.

Furthermore, the ruling reinforces the idea that judicial remedies cannot always extend to actions taken by state agents in foreign contexts, suggesting a deference to the political branches in matters involving international relations. In discussing the implications of this case, students should consider the balance between protecting individuals' rights and the potential hazards in allowing judicial intervention in foreign affairs.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1The Bivens remedy does not extend to cross-border shootings; what are the implications of this for foreign nationals?
  2. 2What reasoning did the Court provide regarding the application of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments extraterritorially?
  3. 3How does this case relate to the principles of sovereign immunity?
  4. 4Can you explain why the Court was concerned about foreign relations in this case?
  5. 5What are the broader implications of this holding for similar cases involving U.S. agents abroad?
Mnemonic Device

Bivens Boundaries - No cross-border claims!

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named AgentsBivens established a cause of action for federal constitutional violations, while Hernandez limits the application of Bivens to contexts without foreign policy implications.
Alvarez v. United StatesAlvarez addressed Fourth Amendment search issues on U.S. soil, while Hernandez concerns extraterritorial application of constitutional rights.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Limiting the Bivens remedy preserves the delicate balance in international relations and avoids entanglement in diplomatic conflicts.

Against the Rule

Denying a remedy for cross-border shootings undermines accountability for federal agents and may lead to violative conduct without consequence.

Class Discussion Points
  • The implications of this ruling for future cases involving U.S. officials and foreign nationals.
  • How does Hernandez v. Mesa reflect the tension between individual rights and foreign policy considerations?
  • The role of the Supreme Court in delineating the scope of constitutional protections in international contexts.
Exam Angle

This case typically appears in exams focusing on constitutional law and remedies for constitutional violations, specifically addressing the boundaries of the Bivens doctrine and extraterritorial application of constitutional protections.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.