When a government official acts in an obviously unconstitutional manner, is that sufficient for the violation to be clearly established, as this Court has held and other Circuits have ruled in analogous circumstances, or is a violation clearly established only if there is binding precedent in a factually indistinguishable case, as the Seventh Circuit required here?

When a government official acts in an obviously unconstitutional manner, is that sufficient for the violation to be clearly established, or is a violation clearly established only if there is binding precedent in a factually indistinguishable case?