Matteo Godi
banner
matteogodi.bsky.social
Matteo Godi
@matteogodi.bsky.social
law prof at USC Gould; ex appellate lawyer

job-talk paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4925020
If you’re curious, you can find the full article on SSRN. And don’t forget to check out the Short Circuit podcast (@shortcircuitij.bsky.social)! (end)
Section 1983: A Strict Liability Statutory Tort
<p><span>Scholars have traditionally framed Section 1983 as a “constitutional tort,” and they have recently devoted much attention to critiquing one side effect
papers.ssrn.com
November 22, 2025 at 6:25 PM
A faithful reading would not only clear up a lot of mess in this area (and especially qualified immunity!), but also highlight tort law’s dualism and the unique role of statutory torts: defining, reaffirming, and pursuing specific public goals through private law mechanisms of enforcement. (7/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:23 PM
That move rewrote a harm-based tort into a conduct-based one--not only undermining Congress's Reconstruction design, but also clashing with basic tort principles. Strict liability attaches because of the infliction of an unjustifiable harm, not because of defective or unreasonable conduct. (6/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:23 PM
The text, legislative debates, and early cases through the 1950s all assumed strict liability. But starting in the mid-20th century, courts grafted fault (states of mind and qualified immunity) onto Section 1983 through constitutional rhetoric and federalism concerns. (5/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Why strict liability? Congress wanted to end a state of affairs where individual rights were taken away “by reason of prejudice, passion, neglect, intolerance or otherwise.” State officials couldn’t be trusted, so Congress made them strictly liable, regardless of mental state or good faith. (4/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:20 PM
That shift lacks any basis in the 1871 text or history. As enacted, Section 1983 imposed liability whenever a state actor deprives someone of federal rights—regardless of fault or culpability, and without requiring the violation of some standard of conduct or duty. (3/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:20 PM
The core claim: Section 1983 was enacted as a strict-liability tort, but courts transformed it into a fault-based provision by shifting the focus from the victim's rights deprivations to the tortfeasor’s duty violations. (2/8)
November 22, 2025 at 6:19 PM
Reposted by Matteo Godi
The famous rallying cry was “no more Souters.” But I wonder whether, in this fractious time, we actually need more David Souters, rather than fewer. On this gray morning, the world certainly feels like a poorer place without David Souter in it. RIP.
May 9, 2025 at 1:58 PM
Thank you so much, Lindsay! I’m super excited!
April 2, 2025 at 12:32 AM
As an immigrant (🇮🇹) and first-gen college grad (🧑🏻‍🎓), I wouldn’t be here without the village of loved ones, mentors, and friends who helped me along the way. You know who you are (if you’re even reading this!). Grazie di cuore!
March 27, 2025 at 6:28 PM
And I guess now is about as good a time as any to share some exciting personal news: in a few months, I’ll be joining the faculty at the University of Southern California (@gould.usc.edu) as an assistant professor of law! (2/3)
March 27, 2025 at 6:28 PM
To my 4 followers, if you’re wondering what to expect… It probably will be a whole lot of nothing, with occasional legal commentary broken up by adorable floof!
March 2, 2025 at 8:14 PM