Listen & Download

On April 2, 2012 the Supreme Court announced its decision in Rehberg v. Paulk. The question in this case was whether a person who served as a “complaining witness” in a grand jury proceeding, and was later accused of presenting false testimony, was entitled to the same absolute immunity from suit that protects a witness who testifies at trial.

In an opinion delivered by Justice Alito, the Court unanimously held that the a grand jury witness is entitled to the same immunity as a trial witness; namely, absolute immunity from any civil rights claim that is based on the witness’ testimony.

To discuss the case, we have William Thro, who is University Counsel and Associate Professor of Constitutional Studies at Christopher Newport University, and the former Solicitor General of Virginia (2004-08).

[Return to the SCOTUScast menu]