ISSUE BRIEF: Repairing Our System of Constitutional Accountability: Reflections on the 150th Anniversary of Section 1983

Summary

Cardozo L. Rev. De·Novo (Forthcoming 2022)

Enacted in 1871 against the backdrop of horrific state and Ku Klux Klan violence aimed at undoing Reconstruction and a criminal justice system that systematically devalued Black life, Section 1983 gave those victimized by official abuse of power a critical tool to hold state and local governments and their officials accountable in a court of law. It aimed to stop state actors and others from killing, brutalizing, and terrorizing Black people with impunity. Section 1983 sought to “carry into execution the guarantees of the Constitution in favor of personal security and personal rights,” reflecting that, in our constitutional system, “judicial tribunals of the country are the places to which the citizen resorts for protection of his person and his property in every case in a free government.”

In the text of Section 1983, Congress demanded government accountability, seeking to put an end to the denial of fundamental rights and subjugation of those seeking to enjoy the promise of freedom after centuries of chattel slavery. Indeed, Congress modeled Section 1983 on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, a statute that refused to provide any official immunities because that would “place[] officials above the law.” The accountability Section 1983 sought to achieve, however, remains elusive because the remedy Congress designed has been gutted by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has converted a statute designed to open the courthouse doors to those aggrieved by official abuse of power into a statute that bolts the courthouse doors firmly shut, immunizing wrongdoers rather than holding them to account. The respect for enacted text the Supreme Court repeatedly preaches has been missing in action when it comes to Section 1983.

More from Access to Justice

Access to Justice
June 18, 2026

CAC Release: Court Further Muddies the Waters on the Scope of the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine in Majority Opinion that Ignores Critical Reconstruction-Era History Regarding the Role of Federal Courts as the Chief Guardians of Federal Rights

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in T.M. v. University of...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Access to Justice
June 3, 2026

How to Get Neil Gorsuch to Stand Up For Workers

Slate
CAC Legal Fellow Harith Khawaja wrote an article for Slate magazine explaining how CAC's text...
By: Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
May 28, 2026

CAC Release: A Victory for Text, History, and Delivery Workers in Flowers Foods v. Brock

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Flowers Foods v. Brock,...
Access to Justice
April 28, 2026

CAC Release: In Cisco v. Doe Argument, Justices Grapple with the Scope of Liability Under Two Critical Human Rights Statutes

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Cisco Systems...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
April 27, 2026

Human Rights Suit Over Cisco Work for China Heads to Supreme Court

Bloomberg Law
CAC Senior Appellate Counsel Miriam Becker-Cohen was interviewed by Bloomberg Law about our brief in Cisco...
Access to Justice
April 17, 2026

The Most Offensive Thing a Supreme Court Justice Can Do Is Be Honest About the Supreme Court

Balls & Strikes
Balls & Strikes featured David H. Gans's article on the importance of the Black Conventions....