Defenseless Constitutional Violations: Egbert v. Boule and the End of Bivens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The case of Robert Boule, the owner of a bed-and-breakfast near the US-Canada border, highlights his constant involvement with the US Customs and Border Protection. Boule accused Customs and Border Patrol Agent Erik Egbert of misconduct after Egbert refused to leave his property and became violent. Boule filed a civil action against Egbert, alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment (excessive use of force) and the First Amendment (unlawful retaliation). Boule needed the district court to recognize new damages actions for each alleged violation, but the court declined. On appeal, the court of appeals extended the Bivens ruling, only to be reversed by the Supreme Court in Egbert v. Boule (2022), which held that Bivens does not apply to Boule's claims. This decision reflects the Supreme Court's reluctance to recognize new causes of action for constitutional violations, effectively limiting individuals' access to remedies for rights violations. Egbert's case signifies a significant setback for Bivens, potentially leaving victims of constitutional violations defenseless.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.033 | 0.027 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".