Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
In Re Bahig Bishay
Paid petition
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
in the D.C. Circuit on December 27, 2024 *** [un] answered after the circuit acknowledged its disqualification in the entirety to sit en banc under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure *** A. Whether government employees classified as judicial officers are absolutely immune from prosecution for declaratory relief only, if they are sued solely in individual capacity for violating the U.S. Constitution; and for foreclosing Civil / Constitutional Rights while acting under color of law, thus deemed to have acted ultra vires their assigned judicial authority and immediately became private actors stripped of their status as representatives of the sovereign, as the U.S. Supreme Court so held in Ex parte Young to wit: When an official acts pursuant to an unconstitutional statute, the absence of valid authority leaves the official ultra vires his authority, and thus a private actor stripped of his status as a representative of the sovereign. It is simply an illegal act on the part of the official... ‘If the act which the state Attorney General seeks to enforce is a violation of the Federal Constitution, the officer in proceeding under such enactment comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution,
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Bahig F. Bishay
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 06 2025Petition DENIED.
- Jul 02 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
- Jun 10 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Apr 28 2025Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due June 30, 2025)