Messerschmidt and Convergence in Action: A Reply to Comments on Trawling for Herring

Columbia Law Review, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2012

U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 218

16 Pages Posted: 29 Apr 2012  

Jennifer E. Laurin

University of Texas School of Law

Date Written: April 27, 2012

Abstract

This short essay examines the Supreme Court's recent decision Fourth Amendment qualified immunity decision in Messerschmidt v. Millender through the framework of doctrinal borrowing and convergence set forth in my prior piece Trawling for Herring, and responds to incisive responses to that prior essay from Professors John Greabe, Colin Starger, Nelson Tebbe, and Robert Tsai. In short, Messerschmidt strongly exemplifies a continuing trend of convergence between exclusionary rule and constitutional tort doctrine, and does so in a manner that exhibits some of the most negative pathologies of doctrinal borrowing and convergence that Trawling identified.

Suggested Citation

Laurin, Jennifer E., Messerschmidt and Convergence in Action: A Reply to Comments on Trawling for Herring (April 27, 2012). Columbia Law Review, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2012; U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 218. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2047093

Jennifer E. Laurin (Contact Author)

University of Texas School of Law ( email )

727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
49
Abstract Views
366