. . . "14114"^^ . . . . . "Individuals have an implied cause of action against federal government officials who have violated their constitutional rights. Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded."@en . . . . . . . "Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents,"@en . "Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents"@en . . . . . "1754621"^^ . "Black"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Burger"@en . "Harlan"@en . . . . . . . "1971"^^ . . . . "2017"^^ . . . "1971"^^ . . "2020"^^ . "2021"^^ . . "--01-12"^^ . "2022"^^ . . . . "17280.0"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . "--06-21"^^ . . . . . . . "172800.0"^^ . "388"^^ . . . . . . . . . . "403"^^ . . . . "Brennan"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "21"^^ . "19"^^ . . . "17"^^ . . "15"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Blackmun"@en . . . . "1095945181"^^ . . . . . . . . . . "Douglas, Stewart, White, Marshall"@en . ""@en . "Webster Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics"@en . . . "17280.0"^^ . "Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was a case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that an implied cause of action existed for an individual whose Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The victim of such a deprivation could sue for the violation of the Fourth Amendment itself despite the lack of any federal statute authorizing such a suit. The existence of a remedy for the violation was implied by the importance of the right violated. The case has been subsequently interpreted to create a cause of action against the federal government similar to the one in 42 U.S.C. \u00A7 1983 against the states."@en . "589"^^ . "Webster Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics"@en . . . . "Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was a case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that an implied cause of action existed for an individual whose Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The victim of such a deprivation could sue for the violation of the Fourth Amendment itself despite the lack of any federal statute authorizing such a suit. The existence of a remedy for the violation was implied by the importance of the right violated."@en . . "582"^^ . . . . . . . . "Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents"@en . "592"^^ . . . "596"^^ .