In Anderson v. Creighton et al., the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether federal law enforcement officials were immune from lawsuits for damages under Bivens actions, which allow individuals to sue federal government officials for violating their constitutional rights. The case arose when FBI agent Theodore Anderson and other officers conducted a warrantless search of Edward and Shirley Creighton's home while pursuing a bank robbery suspect. The Creightons sued, alleging violation of their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court held that qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions unless their conduct violates "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights." However, it also ruled that this protection would not apply if an official knew or should have known they were infringing upon these clearly established rights, acted with malicious intention to do so, or took action no reasonable person could have believed was lawful. Thus in this case, Agent Anderson would be shielded by qualified immunity only if he could prove his belief that the search was lawful was reasonable considering the circumstances - a question left up to lower courts on remand.

In the dissenting opinion for Anderson v. Creighton, Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to grant qualified immunity to FBI agents was incorrect because it failed to consider whether a reasonable officer would have known his actions were unlawful in light of clearly established law and facts. He contended that this standard should be applied objectively rather than subjectively, meaning an officer's personal beliefs about legality are irrelevant; what matters is if a reasonable person in their position would know their conduct violated someone’s constitutional rights. Furthermore, he criticized the majority for not providing clear guidance on how lower courts should apply this new standard going forward. Finally, he expressed concern that granting broad immunity could undermine public trust in law enforcement by allowing officers who violate citizens' rights to escape accountability.