Reichle v. Howards

The Court had to consider a line of cases in which lower courts established the unlawfulness of arrests if done in retaliation of a First Amendment right. “In this Court’s view, the presence of probable cause, while not a ‘guarantee’ that retaliatory motive did not cause the prosecution, still precluded any prima facie inference that retaliatory motive was the but-for cause of the plaintiff’s injury.” Given that the officers had probable cause for the arrest, the Court was satisfied that they could rely on qualified immunity as a defense. “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” “The ‘clearly established” standard is not satisfied here. This Court has never recognized a First Amendment right to be free from a retaliatory arrest that is supported by probable cause.”