One question becomes is the government employee is doing things outside the scope of his employment.
If the gov. employee is acting outside the scope of his employment then he is just like you and me.
If he has immunity is one question (this is governed by state law and case law). But generally immunity is an affirmative defense and does not exist until plead in court.
A government official can be acting outside the scope of his employment if he is doing things he is not authorized to do.
But even when he is acting outside the scope of employment he may still be able to plead immunity.
So these are two separate and distinct things ... outside the scope of employment and immunity.
Last I checked, in CT not everything a state employee does is covered by the scope of employment theory and immunity is not present if the actions are wantonly in violation of a constitutional or statutory right. In Illinois, almost everything is covered with immunity and almost everything is considered within the scope of employment and in Utah doing things outside the scope of employment eliminates all immunity.
And if the gov't employee is a federal employee, he is still governed by state law.
So one should learn the rules regarding what is within the scope of employment and immunity for gov't officials, at least in the state(s) you frequent.