Whether the Court of Appeals correctly concluded that a forum of defense and an unrelated fee-shifting statute preclude a Bivens remedy

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This Court has stated that individual unconstitutional acts “are difficult to address except by way of damages actions after the fact,”! and that “forums of defense,” together with fee-shifting provisions, are an insufficient “patchwork” to cause “the Judiciary to stay its Bivens hand.”? Here, did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that a forum of defense and an unrelated feeshifting statute preclude a Bivens remedy? 1 Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 8.Ct. 1843, 1862 (2017). 2 Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 U.S. 537, 556 (2007).