Background
Three parents sued a school security aide, George Archuleta, alleging he violated the Fourth Amendment by touching students’ genitals through their pants during a search. The district court denied summary judgment, finding that a jury could reasonably conclude Archuleta deliberately touched the students for personal gratification. Archuleta appealed, arguing he was entitled to qualified immunity based on his version of the events.
The court’s reasoning
The court explained that while it has jurisdiction over denials of qualified immunity, it can only consider abstract issues of law. It cannot review cases where the defendant disputes the facts the district court determined a reasonable jury could find. Since Archuleta’s arguments rested on his own version of the facts rather than the legal clarity of the right, the court lacked jurisdiction.
What it means going forward
School officials and other defendants cannot appeal qualified immunity denials if their defense relies on contesting the factual record established by the district court.