On Sunday, Just the News posted an article about a law recently proposed by Democratic Representatives Hank Johnson (Ga.) and Jamie Raskin (Md.).
The article reports:
Democratic Reps. Hank Johnson (Ga.) and Jamie Raskin (Md.) on Wednesday reintroduced the Bivens Act, which would allow citizens to recover damages for constitutional violations committed against them by federal law enforcement officials.
The bill, which the lawmakers first introduced last year, seeks “to provide a civil remedy for an individual whose rights have been violated by a person acting under federal authority.” It would do this by adding five words — “of the United States or” — to a longstanding provision enacted in 1871, known as Section 1983, which gives individuals the right to sue state or local officials who violate their civil and constitutional rights. The additional words would include federal officials in the statute.
The FBI, Justice Department, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and federal prison officials are among the law enforcement entities that would be held accountable under the legislation.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) introduced a companion bill in the Senate this week.
Supporters of the legislation argue that no statute, including Section 1983, currently gives individuals the right to sue federal officials who violate the Constitution. Johnson and Raskin said as much in a press release, pointing to the former Trump administration as reason to pass their bill.
Obviously if this bill is passed, there are many possibilities for its abuse, but it also might open the path to justice for some of the January 6th defendants.
The article notes:
Several Jan. 6 prisoners allege the FBI, Justice Department, and federal prison officials under the Biden administration have violated their civil and constitutional rights.
Thomas Caldwell, 66, for example, says he was arrested at his Virginia farm in January and interrogated for hours without being told what he was being charged with. Caldwell, a military veteran, never entered the Capitol building on Jan. 6 but spent well over a month in solitary confinement.
George Tanios, 40, says he had a similar experience at his West Virginia home in March, claiming federal agents wouldn’t answer him when he asked why they were arresting him. He was imprisoned on charges related to the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick and remained in jail for months, despite the District of Columbia’s chief medical examiner concluding Sicknick died of unrelated natural causes. According to Tanios, his business was devastated as a result of his arrest and imprisonment.
Christopher Worrell was also arrested and imprisoned for his involvement in the Capitol riot despite never entering the building. In October, a federal judge found D.C. Jail Warden Wanda Patten and D.C. Department of Corrections Director Quincy Booth in contempt of court for refusing to turn over records related to the care of Worrell, who suffers from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and had a broken hand. The judge referred the matter to the attorney general “for appropriate inquiry into potential civil rights violations of Jan. 6 defendants, as exemplified in this case.”
Worrell’s lawyer said his client was subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” in the jail that houses most of the Jan. 6 prisoners. The D.C. jail has come under heightened scrutiny in recent weeks over its conditions and treatment of inmates.
The U.S. attorney for D.C. is the federal official primarily leading the prosecution of Jan. 6 defendants. The position is appointed by the president.
It’s unclear whether Johnson, Raskins, or Whitehouse were aware their bills would potentially provide legal recourse for Jan. 6 prisoners. Raskins’s office had no comment when asked whether he’d considered this possibility before cosponsoring the legislation and whether he had any problem with the prospect of Jan. 6 prisoners using his bill as a way to sue the Biden administration for alleged mistreatment.
Stay tuned.