Hernandezv. Mesa

140 S.Ct. 735 (2020)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Sergio, a 15-year-old Mexican national, was with a group of friends in a concrete culvert that separates El Paso, Texas, from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. The border runs through the center of the culvert, which was designed to hold the waters of the Rio Grande River but is now largely dry. D detained one of Sergio’s friends who had run onto the United States’ side of the culvert. After Sergio, who was also on the United States’ side, ran back across the culvert onto Mexican soil, D fired two shots at Sergio; one struck and killed him on the other side of the border. Ps claim that Sergio and friends were simply playing a game, running across the culvert, touching the fence on the U. S. side, and then running back across the border. According to D, Sergio and his friends were involved in an illegal border crossing attempt, and they pelted him with rocks. The Department of Justice concluded that D had not violated Customs and Border Patrol policy or training, and it declined to bring charges or take other action against him. Mexico was not and is not satisfied with the U. S. investigation. It requested that D be extradited to face criminal charges in a Mexican court, a request that the United States has denied. The Department of Justice concluded that D had not violated Customs and Border Patrol policy or training, and it declined to bring charges or take other action against him. Mexico was not and is not satisfied with the U. S. investigation. It requested that D be extradited to face criminal charges in a Mexican court, a request that the United States has denied. Ps brought suit for damages in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. They sought recovery of damages under Bivens, alleging that D violated Sergio’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. The District Court granted D’s motion to dismiss, and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sitting en banc has twice affirmed this dismissal.