Fernandez v. United States · ¶31

This is not the first time we have addressed the relationship between the habeas statutes and other kinds of prisoner litigation. In Preiser v. Rodriguez, prisoners brought claims under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 challenging the forfeiture of their good-time credits, and their claims “plainly came within the literal terms of that statute.” 411 U. S. 475, 488 (1973). Even so, we held that “[t]he broad language of § 1983” did not afford the prisoners a cause of action. Id., at 489. “Congress has determined that habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy for state prisoners attacking the validity of the fact or length of their confinement, and that specific determination must override the general terms of § 1983.” Id., at 490. Challenges “close to the core of habeas corpus” must be brought, if at all, under “the specific federal habeas corpus statute”—in that case § 2254—which was “explicitly and…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.