...According to the Congressional defendants, the standard set by the Court in the Harlow case was that: . . . government officials performing discretionary functions...generally are shielded from liability for civil damages 1 For a discussion of the Harlow case and a copy of the opinion see page 689 of Court Proceedings and...

...S. Cl. 2727. 2736-39 t I982I. Defining "jqjualified or -food faith' immunity." the Court held that "government officials performing discretionary functions...rights of which a reasonable person would have known.' Id. at 2738. This "|r)eliancc on the objective reasonableness of an official's conduct. as measured...

...immunity from suit. With respect to the application of this qualified immunity, the court ruled that "government officials performing discretionary functions...rights of which a reasonable person would have known." In determining that Presidential aides are not as a rule entitled to absolute immunity, the Court distinguished...

...defendant-employees against an objective standard of reasonableness. There is no liability if the employee's "conduct does not violate clearly established statutory...rights of which a reasonable person would have known." That is a quotation from Hurlow v. Fitzgeruld, 50 USLW 4815, 4820 (6/24/82). I see no valid reason...

...conduct not satisfied) ; Holloman v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 947, 950, 275 SE2d 620, 622 (1981) (accord). from liability for civil damages insofar as their...constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."4* Importantly, the Court in Harlow expressly rejected the civil equivalent of the "premium...

...— and held that government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from personal liability for civil damages "insofar as their conduct...rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Several questions will now be addressed. 1. "Have these two decisions inhibited or prevented teachers...

...personal liability. The standard of such liability is whether the conduct of the official "violatefs] clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 US 800, 818 (1982). The Court today leaves in doubt the reach of its decision....

...official responsibility would violate the constitutional rights of the plaintiff • • •• . "• * [G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions...rights of which a reasonable person would have known . "* * [W]e provide no_ license to lawless conduct." 457 US 800 (1982) . Harlow v Fitzgerald, Finally,...

...responsibility would violate the constitutional rights of the plaintiff • • *'. "* * [G] overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally...rights of which a reasonable person would have known. "* * [W]e provide no license to lawless conduct." Harlow v Fitzgerald, 457 US 800 (1982) . Finally,...

...v. Fitzgerald the standard is the objective reasonableness of the officals conduct. If the officals' conduct does not violate clearly established statutory...rights of which a reasonable person would have known, the offical is shielded from civil damages. Moreover, the proposed amendment does not cure the problem...