| Pierson v. Ray | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 11, 1967 Decided April 11, 1967 | |
| Full case name | Robert L. Pierson v. J. L. Ray |
| Citations | 386 U.S. 547 (more) 87 S. Ct. 1213; 18 L. Ed. 2d 288; 1967 U.S. LEXIS 2791 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Pierson v. Ray, 352 F.2d 213 (5th Cir. 1965); cert. granted, 384 U.S. 938 (1966) |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Warren, joined by Black, Clark, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart, White, Fortas |
| Dissent | Douglas |
Superseded by | |
| Harlow v. Fitzgerald, Anderson v. Creighton | |
Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court first introduced the justification for qualified immunity for police officers from being sued for civil rights violations under Section 1983, by arguing that "[a] policeman's lot is not so unhappy that he must choose between being charged with dereliction of duty if he does not arrest when he had probable cause, and being mulcted in damages if he does."[1]
- ^ Schwartz, Joanna C. (2017). "How Qualified Immunity Fails" (PDF). The Yale Law Journal. Yale Law School. Retrieved February 26, 2020.