Access to Justice

RELEASE: A Win for Rodney Reed, for Justice, and for Fidelity to the Original Meaning of Section 1983

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s announcement of its decision in Reed v. Goertz,  Constitutional Accountability Center Appellate Counsel Miriam Becker-Cohen issued the following reaction:

This opinion may be short, but it is powerful in its effect: paving the way for Rodney Reed, a death-row defendant who has consistently maintained his innocence for over twenty years, to seek DNA testing of crime-scene evidence, and settling that, consistent with Section 1983’s history and original meaning, the accrual of a claim brought pursuant to that statute must be tailored to the nature of the constitutional right asserted. Agreeing with the arguments in the brief CAC filed in support of Reed, the Court today held that Reed’s procedural due process claim did not accrue until “the state litigation ended and deprived Reed of his asserted liberty interest in DNA testing—when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Reed’s motion for rehearing.” And echoing our brief, the Court explained that the “soundness of that straightforward conclusion” is reinforced by “core principles of federalism, comity, consistency, and judicial economy.” We are pleased that the Court reached this conclusion, recognizing that the text and history of Section 1983 indicate that it is a vehicle fundamentally designed to remedy state and local violations of federal law.

##

Resources:

Case page in Reed v. Goertz: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/reed-v-goertz/ 

Supreme Court Can Improve Access to Courts Next Term in Reed v. Goertz: https://www.theusconstitution.org/blog/supreme-court-can-improve-access-to-courts-next-term-in-reed-v-goertz/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a nonpartisan think tank and public interest law firm dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text, history, and values. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Access to Justice

Access to Justice
March 4, 2026

CAC Release: Unanimous Supreme Court Rejects State-Affiliated Corporation’s Claim of Immunity from Suit

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Galette v. New Jersey...
By: Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
February 25, 2026

CAC Release: In Disappointing Sixth Amendment Decision, the Supreme Court Made Clear the Limits of Its Decision

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Villarreal v. Texas, a...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Access to Justice
February 12, 2026

February Newsletter: CAC Supports Everyday Americans Fighting for Their Day in Court

At every level of our judicial system, a complex set of doctrines determines what cases...
Access to Justice
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Taylor v. Healthcare Associates of Texas

In United States ex rel. Taylor v. Healthcare Associates of Texas, the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act violate Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Flowers Foods v. Brock

In Flowers Foods v. Brock, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Federal Arbitration Act exempts from arbitration “last-mile” delivery drivers who transport goods between two points in the same state to their final destinations,...
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System

In T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine requires dismissal of a request for relief from a state-court decision that did not reach the state’s highest...