FederalAgents - Revision history

RobertBushman: /* Egpert v. Boule */

2022-06-09T06:23:05Z

Egpert v. Boule

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:23, 9 June 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Socioeconomics]]		[[Category:Socioeconomics]]

	= ~~Egpert~~ v. Boule =		= Egbert v. Boule =

	https://www.wwnytv.com/2022/06/08/high-court-limits-suing-officials-over-rights-violations/		https://www.wwnytv.com/2022/06/08/high-court-limits-suing-officials-over-rights-violations/

RobertBushman: /* Egpert v. Boule */

2022-06-09T06:22:07Z

Egpert v. Boule

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:22, 9 June 2022
Line 3:		Line 3:
	= Egpert v. Boule =		= Egpert v. Boule =

			https://www.wwnytv.com/2022/06/08/high-court-limits-suing-officials-over-rights-violations/

			<blockquote>
	In March 2014, Boule told Border Patrol agent Erik Egbert that a guest arriving at the inn was from Turkey. Egbert has said he was suspicious that the guest would travel over 7,500 miles to stay at “a rundown bed-and-breakfast,” and when the guest arrived, he went to the property to investigate. Boule asked him to leave, but Egbert allegedly threw him to the ground, injuring him. After determining the guest was legally in the country, Egbert left. The guest ultimately crossed into Canada illegally the same night.		In March 2014, Boule told Border Patrol agent Erik Egbert that a guest arriving at the inn was from Turkey. Egbert has said he was suspicious that the guest would travel over 7,500 miles to stay at “a rundown bed-and-breakfast,” and when the guest arrived, he went to the property to investigate. Boule asked him to leave, but Egbert allegedly threw him to the ground, injuring him. After determining the guest was legally in the country, Egbert left. The guest ultimately crossed into Canada illegally the same night.

Line 12:		Line 15:

	The case is Egpert v. Boule, 21-147.		The case is Egpert v. Boule, 21-147.
			</blockquote>

RobertBushman: /* Egpert v. Boule */

2022-06-09T06:21:41Z

Egpert v. Boule

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 9 June 2022
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Boule notified Egbert’s supervisors and filed an administrative claim about the rough treatment, and Boule says Egbert retaliated by making reports about him and his business to various state and federal agencies including the Internal Revenue Service. But no agency found Boule did anything wrong. Thomas wrote that after a year-long investigation, the Border Patrol took no action against Egbert. A document filed in the case shows the investigation concluded Egbert’s removal from his position was warranted because he wasn’t forthcoming with investigators. But Egbert continues to work for the Border Patrol, Boule’s lawyer said.		Boule notified Egbert’s supervisors and filed an administrative claim about the rough treatment, and Boule says Egbert retaliated by making reports about him and his business to various state and federal agencies including the Internal Revenue Service. But no agency found Boule did anything wrong. Thomas wrote that after a year-long investigation, the Border Patrol took no action against Egbert. A document filed in the case shows the investigation concluded Egbert’s removal from his position was warranted because he wasn’t forthcoming with investigators. But Egbert continues to work for the Border Patrol, Boule’s lawyer said.

	Boule sued, saying Egbert had violated his Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force and his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him. A federal trial court ruled for Egbert, but an appeals court reversed the decision and Egbert appealed to the Supreme Court.		Boule sued, saying Egbert had violated his Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force and his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him. A federal trial court ruled for Egbert, but an appeals court reversed the decision and Egbert appealed to the Supreme Court [which ruled in his favor].

	The Associated Press was one of nearly three dozen media organizations that joined a brief urging the justices to side with Boule, arguing that the ability of journalists to sue federal officials for damages over First Amendment violations is important to press freedom.		The Associated Press was one of nearly three dozen media organizations that joined a brief urging the justices to side with Boule, arguing that the ability of journalists to sue federal officials for damages over First Amendment violations is important to press freedom.

	The case is Egpert v. Boule, 21-147.		The case is Egpert v. Boule, 21-147.

RobertBushman: Created page with "Category:Socioeconomics = Egpert v. Boule = In March 2014, Boule told Border Patrol agent Erik Egbert that a guest arriving at the inn was from Turkey. Egbert has said h..."

2022-06-09T06:21:00Z

Created page with "Category:Socioeconomics = Egpert v. Boule = In March 2014, Boule told Border Patrol agent Erik Egbert that a guest arriving at the inn was from Turkey. Egbert has said h..."

New page

[[Category:Socioeconomics]]

= Egpert v. Boule =

In March 2014, Boule told Border Patrol agent Erik Egbert that a guest arriving at the inn was from Turkey. Egbert has said he was suspicious that the guest would travel over 7,500 miles to stay at “a rundown bed-and-breakfast,” and when the guest arrived, he went to the property to investigate. Boule asked him to leave, but Egbert allegedly threw him to the ground, injuring him. After determining the guest was legally in the country, Egbert left. The guest ultimately crossed into Canada illegally the same night.

Boule notified Egbert’s supervisors and filed an administrative claim about the rough treatment, and Boule says Egbert retaliated by making reports about him and his business to various state and federal agencies including the Internal Revenue Service. But no agency found Boule did anything wrong. Thomas wrote that after a year-long investigation, the Border Patrol took no action against Egbert. A document filed in the case shows the investigation concluded Egbert’s removal from his position was warranted because he wasn’t forthcoming with investigators. But Egbert continues to work for the Border Patrol, Boule’s lawyer said.

Boule sued, saying Egbert had violated his Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force and his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him. A federal trial court ruled for Egbert, but an appeals court reversed the decision and Egbert appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Associated Press was one of nearly three dozen media organizations that joined a brief urging the justices to side with Boule, arguing that the ability of journalists to sue federal officials for damages over First Amendment violations is important to press freedom.

The case is Egpert v. Boule, 21-147.