to at least qualified immunity, as plaintiff concedes. Richardson, 5 F.3d at 623-24 (held Selsky entitled to qualified immunity on facts before court; no discussion of absolute immunity). A government official has qualified immunity from liability for damages based on his official acts as long as those acts violate no clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Weg v. Macchiarola, 995 F.2d 15, 18 (2d Cir.1993). The defendant must establish that he had an objectively reasonable belief that his act violated no clearly established rights. Id. Since the district court did not consider this issue, we remand so that it may do so. Judgment reversed and case remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 . Compare Moye v. Selsky, 826 F.Supp. 712, 724 (S.D.N.Y.1993) (<HOLDING>); Lopez v. Coughlin, 92 Civ. 7713 (KMW), 1994
holding that a judge was not entitled to absolute immunity for firing an employee holding that prosecutors have absolute immunity holding selsky not entitled to absolute immunity holding that the considerations underlying absolute prosecutorial immunity at common law dictate the same absolute immunity under  1983 holding that an officer applying for a warrant without probable cause may be entitled to qualified immunity but is not entitled to absolute immunity