Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center
Access to Justice

RELEASE: Conservative Justices Deny Accountability to Family After Cross-Border Killing of Their Son

“The bottom line take-away after today’s ruling is that U.S. border guards can continue to abuse their power with impunity.” — CAC Civil Rights Director David Gans

WASHINGTON – On news this morning that the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 ruling in Hernández v. Mesa—with the five conservative Justices voting against the family of a boy fatally shot by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent that attempted to sue for damages in federal court—Constitutional Accountability Center issued the following reaction:

CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod said, “The Court’s majority today fails to take seriously the role that the Founders assigned the courts as checks on unconstitutional government action. As Justice Ginsburg notes in her dissent, the death in this case is ‘not an isolated incident.’ The result of the Court’s decision today will be as troubling as it is unsurprising: continued abuses of governmental power.”

CAC Civil Rights Director David Gans added, “The bottom line take-away after today’s ruling is that U.S. border guards can continue to abuse their power with impunity. The Court has closed the courthouse doors on those victimized by federal officers, leaving them with no remedy.”

#

Resources:

CAC case page, Hernández v. Mesa: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/hernandez-v-mesa-u-s-sup-ct/

“A Murdered Mexican Boy and the Abuse of American Power at the Border,” David Gans, The New Republic, February 20, 2017: https://newrepublic.com/article/140746/murdered-mexican-boy-abuse-american-power-border

##

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

###

More from Access to Justice

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...
Access to Justice
January 14, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Justices Pose Difficult Questions to State-Affiliated Corporation that Claims Immunity from Suit

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Galette v....
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp. and New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Colt

In Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corporation and New Jersey Transit Corporation v. Colt, the Supreme Court is considering whether state-affiliated corporations have sovereign immunity.