Identify the two elements that plaintiffs in 1983 actions ...

[mmm]

Identify the two elements that plaintiffs in  1983 actions against state and local law enforcement officers have to prove. Identify and describe the two limits placed by SCOTUS on  1983 actions against state and local officers.
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Critics of self-report studies frequently suggest that expecting people to candidly admit illegal acts is unreasonable.
 
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

[bigsis44]

Answer to Question 1

In a  1983 action against state and local law enforcement officers, the plaintiff must prove two elements:
(1) The officials acted under color of state law, which includes all acts done within the scope of the officers' employment.
(2) The officers' actions caused the deprivation of the plaintiff's federal rights.

Besides the two statutory elements that plaintiffs must prove in a  1983 action, SCOTUS has added two more:
(1) The plaintiff cannot recover for accidental or even negligent violations of federal civil rights. The law enforcement officers' violations must be deliberate.
(2) State and local officers are protected by the same qualified immunity, under  1983, that federal officers have, under Bivens and the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Answer to Question 2

T

[mmm]

TYSM

[upturnedfurball]

YES! Correct, THANKS for helping me on my review