context: We must next consider whether Micklus' pro se complaint states a cause of action for damages arising out of the constitution. The Supreme Court has implied a cause of action directly under the constitution and permitted the remedy of damages in two cases.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: Bivens remedy available directly under eighth amendment even though the allegations could support a Federal Tort Claims Act suit
citation_a.sentence: See also, Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14, 100 S.Ct. 1468, 64 L.Ed.2d 15 (1980) (Bivens remedy available directly under eighth amendment even though the allegations could support a Federal Tort Claims Act suit).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.parenthetical: for violation of fifth amendment's due process clause and its equal protection assurance
citation_b.sentence: Davis v. Passman, 442 U.S. 228, 99 S.Ct. 2264, 60 L.Ed.2d 846 (1979) (for violation of fifth amendment’s due process clause and its equal protection assurance); Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) (for violation of fourth amendment rights).