The inquiry asks whether existing precedent placed the question beyond debate, defined at a high degree of specificity rather than at a general level. Controlling authority or a robust consensus of persuasive authority is required.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly reversed generalized formulations.
Alternative Names:
Clearly Established Right|Clearly Established Prong
Why it Matters?
Specificity requirements have tightened substantially, with the Supreme Court repeatedly reversing circuit decisions that defined rights at a general level, which means a plaintiff must identify precedent with closely analogous facts rather than a broad principle. Body camera and technology contexts frequently lack such precedent entirely. Identifying the absence of factually similar authority is the core of the defense brief.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
How specific must precedent be?
Where is precedent frequently absent?
