Settlement prevents SCOTUS opinion on limits of prosecutorial immunity

SCOTUS won't issue a decision in a case questioning whether prosecutors have absolute immunity for fabricating evidence because the parties entered a $12 million settlement, according to SCOTUSBlog:

A case testing the immunity of prosecutors to damage lawsuits for obtaining and using false testimony ended in the Supreme Court Monday, with the two sides agreeing to dismiss it, without specifying reasons. The case was Pottawattamie County, et al., v. McGhee, et al. (08-1065). The Justices had heard argument in the case on Nov. 4, and were weighing a decision when the two sides moved for dismissal under the Court’s Rule 46. The press release from the respondent’s counsel describing the settlement is here.

My guess: Attorneys for the prosecutors thought they were going to lose in a big way and chose to settle rather than have SCOTUS formally strip them of immunity.

Too bad. I was quite looking forward to the opinion on this one.

BLOGVERSATION: From the Volokh Conspiracy, "Looking forward after Pottawatamie." From Norm Pattis, "Pottawatamie Lost." From Text and History, "Pottawatamie Dropped: Absolute Immunity for Prosecutors Lives On." From Section 1983 Blog, "The Next Pottawatamie County?" From Gamso For the Defense, "Blowin' in the wind."

See related Grits posts:

• A 'perverse' position on prosecutors fabricating evidence ... from the Obama Administration
• Prosecutors ask SCOTUS for 'absolute immunity' when fabricating evidence
• Prosecutorial hubris, entitlement, on display in recent cases