The Washington Post

Supreme Court protects Secret Service agents guarding Cheney

Former vice president Dick Cheney speaks at a cardiovascular symposium at Inova Heart and Vascular Institute in McLean, Va., on April 27. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP)

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that Secret Service agents are shielded from a lawsuit brought by a man who said his free speech rights were violated when he was arrested after confronting then-Vice President Dick Cheney.

The court took a narrow path in finding for agents Virgil D. “Gus” Reichle Jr. and Dan Doyle. Although the government wanted broad protection for Secret Service agents who are protecting the nation’s leaders, the court ruled only that the two men could not be sued because the state of the law was unclear when Steven Howards was arrested in 2006 at a Colorado shopping center.

Government officials generally have immunity from civil lawsuits unless they violate rights that are “clearly established,” so that an official understands that “what he is doing violates that right,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court.

“We conclude that, at the time of Howards’ arrest, it was not clearly established that an arrest supported by probable cause could violate the First Amendment.”

Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the case because she had worked on the case while solicitor general in the Obama administration.

The quirky facts of the case may have limited the court’s appetite for a broad ruling.

It arises from a chance encounter between Howards, who was taking his son to a piano recital at the mall, and Cheney, who happened to be at that shopping center in Beaver Creek on June 16, 2006.

According to court records, Doyle heard Howards on a cellphone telling someone, “I’m going to ask him how many kids he’s killed today.”

Howards waited his turn to address Cheney and then told him that his “policies in Iraq are disgusting.” He then touched Cheney’s right shoulder; there’s a dispute about whether it was more of a pat or a shove, but agents did not arrest him.

When Reichle later saw Howards — he was looking for his son — he interviewed Howards about the incident. Howards told the agent that “if you don’t want other people sharing their opinions, you should have him [Cheney] avoid public places.” Howards denied touching Cheney.

Howards said Reichle, who had not witnessed the confrontation, became “visibly angry” in the interview when he shared his opinion on the Iraq war. When other agents confirmed that Howards had touched Cheney, Reichle arrested Howards. Howards was charged under Colorado law with harassment, but the charges were dropped.

While an appeals court said the agents had reason to arrest Howards for the false statements about touching Cheney, it also said Howards could pursue his allegations that the arrest was retaliation for what he had said about Cheney, in violation of the First Amendment.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, indicated that she considered the Secret Service’s job to be different from other law enforcement.

“Whatever the views of Secret Service Agents Reichle and Doyle on the administration’s policies in Iraq, they were duty bound to take the content of Howards’ statements into account in determining whether he posed an immediate threat to the Vice President’s physical security,” she wrote. “Retaliatory animus cannot be inferred from the assessment they made in that regard.”

The case is Reichle v. Howards.

In a separate action Monday, the court declined to hear an appeal from former Alabama governor Don Siegelman. Siegelman was convicted of accepting a bribe when he appointed a campaign donor to a seat on a hospital regulatory board in 1999.

Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Get Zika news by email

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Show Comments
The Democrats debate Thursday. Get caught up on the race.
The big questions after New Hampshire, from The Post's Dan Balz
Can Bernie Sanders cut into Hillary Clinton's strength in the minority community and turn his challenge into a genuine threat? And can any of the Republicans consolidate anti-Trump sentiment in the party in time to stop the billionaire developer and reality-TV star, whose unorthodox, nationalistic campaign has shaken the foundations of American politics?
Clinton in New Hampshire: 2008 vs. 2015
Hillary Clinton did about as well in N.H. this year as she did in 2008, percentage-wise. In the state's main counties, Clinton performed on average only about two percentage points worse than she did eight years ago (according to vote totals as of Wednesday morning) -- and in five of the 10 counties, she did as well or better.
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
Where the race stands

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.