Supreme Court Will Soon Decide Whether To Reconsider Qualified Immunity

Anything and Everything dealing with Political issues.
Post Reply
User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:24 pm
Location: Naples

Supreme Court Will Soon Decide Whether To Reconsider Qualified Immunity

Post by Slartibartfast »

opinions ?


Supreme Court Will Soon Decide Whether To Reconsider Qualified Immunity


https://www.cato.org/blog/may-15th-supr ... -qualified

For the last several years, Cato has been leading the campaign to abolish qualified immunity — an atextual, ahistorical judicial doctrine that shields state officials from liability, even when they violate people’s constitutional rights. The most immediate practical goal of this campaign has been to convince the Supreme Court to hear one of the many cases calling for qualified immunity to be either narrowed or reconsidered outright. And over the last seven months, I’ve written several times about how the Court has indicated that it’s preparing to consider several qualified immunity cases, given the manner in which it has repeatedly rescheduled several cert petitions that have been fully briefed and ready for resolution since October of last year. My hypothesis at the time was that the Supreme Court was delaying resolution of these petitions so that it could consider them along with several other high‐​profile cases that also raised the same underlying question of whether qualified immunity should be reconsidered.
Now it would seem that prediction has been vindicated. Just today, the Supreme Court distributed thirteen* different qualified immunity cert petitions for its conference of May 15, 2020. This is obviously no coincidence, and it means that by the morning of Monday, May 18th, we will finally know whether the Justices are prepared to confront one of the most pernicious and legally baseless doctrines in the history of the Court.

Here’s the complete list of the thirteen different petitions that have been distributed for the May 15th conference. In most of these cases, Cato filed an amicus brief in support of the petition, and in many of them, we either helped coordinate or took the lead on a “cross‐​ideological brief,” on behalf of a diverse alliance of organizations opposed to qualified immunity.


Baxter v. Bracey. In this case, Sixth Circuit granted qualified immunity to two officers who deployed a police dog against a suspect who had already surrendered and was sitting on the ground with his hands up. The ACLU filed a cert petition back in April 2019, asking whether “the judge‐​made doctrine of qualified immunity” should “be narrowed or abolished.” Cato filed a brief in support of the petition, and we also helped to coordinate the filing of a cross‐​ideological brief. This case was originally set to be considered all the way back on October 1, 2019, but it has been rescheduled five times since then. Now, it looks like the Court is finally prepared to resolve Mr. Baxter’s petition.

Brennan v. Dawson. In this case, the Sixth Circuit granted immunity to a police officer who, in an attempt to administer an alcohol breath test to a man on misdemeanor probation, parked his car in front of the man’s home at 8:00pm; turned the lights and sirens on for over an hour; circled the man’s house five to ten times, peering into and knocking on windows; and wrapped the home’s security camera in police tape. The court held that this warrantless invasion of the curtilage violated the Fourth Amendment, but nevertheless granted immunity due to a lack of “clearly established law.” The cert petition in this case was filed on January 11, 2019, and asks the Court to “reign in the qualified immunity standard to … reflect the common‐​law roots of qualified immunity.”

Zadeh v. Robinson. In this case, the Fifth Circuit granted immunity to state investigators that entered a doctor’s office and, without notice and without a warrant, demanded to rifle through the medical records of 16 patients.

Corbitt v. Vickers. This is the case where the Eleventh Circuit granted immunity to a deputy sheriff who shot a ten‐​year‐​old child lying on the ground, while repeatedly attempting to shoot a pet dog that wasn’t posing any threat. The plaintiffs in both Zadeh and Corbitt are now represented by Paul Hughes, who filed cert petitions on November 22, 2019, each of which asks “[w]hether the Court should recalibrate or reverse the doctrine of qualified immunity.” Cato submitted briefs in both cases, this time taking the lead on the cross‐​ideological brief, whose signatories also included the Alliance Defending Freedom, the American Association for Justice, the ACLU, Americans for Prosperity, the Due Process Institute, the Law Enforcement Action Partnership, the MacArthur Justice Center, the NAACP, Public Justice, R Street, and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Kelsay v. Ernst. This is the case where the Eighth Circuit, in an 8–4 en banc decision, granted immunity to a police officer who grabbed a small woman in a bear hug and slammed her to ground, breaking her collarbone and knocking her unconscious, all because she walked away from him after he told her to “get back here.” The MacArthur Justice Center filed a cert petition on November 26, 2019. While the petition doesn’t ask the Court to reconsider qualified immunity outright, it does ask the Court to “take steps within the confines of current law to rein in the most extreme departures from the original meaning of Section 1983.” Cato filed a brief in support of this petition as well.

West v. Winfield. In this case, the Ninth Circuit granted immunity to police officers who bombarded an innocent woman’s home with tear‐​gas grenades. The homeowner had given the officers permission to enter her home to look for a suspect, but never consented to anything like the practical destruction of her home that resulted. Nevertheless, the court granted immunity on the grounds that no prior case specifically established that this sort of bombardment exceeded the scope of consent that the homeowner had given. On January 16, 2020, the Institute for Justice filed a cert petition asking the Court to clarify and limit the scope of qualified immunity, and Cato filed a brief in support of this petition.

Jessop v. City of Fresno. In this case, the Ninth Circuit granted immunity to police officers who stole over $225,000 in cash and rare coins in the course of executing a search warrant. The court noted that noted that while “the theft [of] personal property by police officers sworn to uphold the law” may be “morally wrong,” the officers could not be sued for the theft because the Ninth Circuit had never issued a decision specifically involving the question of “whether the theft of property covered by the terms of a search warrant, and seized pursuant to that warrant, violates the Fourth Amendment.” Neal Katyal filed a cert petition on behalf of Mr. Jessop on February 14, 2020, and Cato, joined by Americans for Prosperity, filed a brief in support of the petition.

Mason v. Faul. In this case, the Fifth Circuit granted immunity to a police officer who shot a man seven times in response to a 911 call. This is one of the rare cases in which qualified immunity was actually resolved at trial, rather than at the motion‐​to‐​dismiss or summary‐​judgment stage. At trial, the jury found that while Officer Faul’s shooting of Quamaine Mason was objectively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, Faul was nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity. The cert petition was filed on November 14, 2019, and it asks the Court to address the “confusion and uncertainty” in qualified immunity case law.

Cooper v. Flaig. In this case, the Fifth Circuit granted immunity to officers who killed an unarmed man in his parents’ home by tasing him nine times while he was having an acute mental‐​health episode. The cert petition was filed on February 5, 2020, and it explicitly asks whether the Court should “eliminate or significantly revise the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity.”

Anderson v. City of Minneapolis. In this case, the Eighth Circuit granted immunity to 911 first responders who were alleged to have prematurely declared a 19‐​year‐​old dead of hypothermia, in violation of their own emergency protocols, thereby depriving him of what could have been life‐​saving medical assistance. The cert petition was filed on November 18, 2019, and it asks the Court to clarify the standards for determining “clearly established law,” especially in the context of the state‐​created danger doctrine.

Clarkston v. White. In this case, the Fifth Circuit granted immunity to a state education official who was alleged to have caused the denial of a charter school application in retaliation for remarks made by the school’s CEO about disciplinary practices. The cert petition was filed on March 3, 2020, and it asks the Court to clarify that qualified immunity should not apply when a constitutional right is clearly established and the only uncertainty in the case law is whether a particular individual can be sued for its violation.

Hunter v. Cole. Of all the qualified immunity cases going to conference on May 15th, this is one of only two in which the lower court denied immunity to the defendants. In this case, the Fifth Circuit denied immunity to an officer who shot a 17‐​year‐​old boy without warning. Although the boy was holding a gun, he had made no threatening gestures toward the officers and was facing away from them and unaware of their presence when he was shot. At the en banc stage, this case generated a lively discussion between several Fifth Circuit judges about whether qualified immunity should be reconsidered, which I discussed here. On December 9, 2019, the officer filed a cert petition, asking the Court to hold that his shooting of the teenage boy did not violate clearly established law.

Davis v. Ermold. The one other case in which the lower court denied immunity involves Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same‐​sex couples in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. Those couples sued Davis for violating their right to marry, and the Sixth Circuit denied immunity to Davis, finding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged that she violated their clearly established constitutional rights. Davis’s cert petition was filed on January 22, 2020.
The fact that the Court sent all thirteen of these cases to conference on the same day — especially after repeatedly rescheduling many of them — is unmistakable evidence that the Justices are looking closely at the fundamental question of whether qualified immunity itself needs to be reconsidered. This is a question that Justice Thomas urged the Court to take up all the way back in 2017, and which Cato has been vigorously pushing since it launched its qualified campaign back in March of 2018. It is far past time for the Supreme Court to reconsider qualified immunity, and in less than three weeks, we’ll finally know whether the Court is prepared to take up that question.
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools !
User avatar
Firemedic2000
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:01 pm
Location: Tampa Bay

Post by Firemedic2000 »

Great post on this subject. I've long believed if law enforcement violates a person's rights or kills hurts innocient AMERICANS. They should be held accountable privately. This immunity just because they wear a badge. Is B.S. if this ignorant law is changed. It will hopefully get rid of a lot of bad officers.

Something else that bothers me is these unions and fraternal order of police organizations that even though these officers right out violated individuals rights. Will still defend them.

Then the police wonder why no one trusts them or only publicly say they like them. So as not to be labeled by them as cop haters. They lie, cover for each other or refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing.
Last edited by Firemedic2000 on Sat May 09, 2020 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RANGER AIRBORNE, BLACK TEAM, FIREMEDIC, NRA BENEFACTOR
In the Government's/Elitist eye's I'm a Terrorist for believing in the Constitution and taking an oath to defend it instead of POLITICAL LEADERS
AirForceShooter
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:36 pm
Location: Sarasota/Manatee

Post by AirForceShooter »

This is going to be interesting

AFS
User avatar
Firemedic2000
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:01 pm
Location: Tampa Bay

Post by Firemedic2000 »

Forgot to add. There are alot of great officers out there. These people go above and beyond their duty.

But it's these unions and departments that try to hide the wrong doing of the bad cops. This reflects upon all cops.

L.E.O.s response is yada yada yada OK cop hater :|

Just like the killing of that innocient black man jogging and those two men basically stalked him from their truck and then murdered him. Just because they THOUGHT he looked like someone. Who he wasn't.

The main culprit that stalked and murdered this innocient American used to be in a law enforcement capacity. Even a former prosecutor basically implied. Nothing here folks move along. They followed the citizens arrest law and even though they stalked this man. Then jumped out with weapons. They were justified in killing him for his attempting to defend his own life by armed stalkers

A moron that looked at that video knew it was wrong. Plus even their own words in what and how they murdered this man was stupid. BTW the person filming it was friends of shooters.

But as far as the local LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS we're concerned this was an open and shut case in self defense in favor of former officer. That is until the video was leaked.

This was a cover-up of a former well known law enforcement official by the local agencies and prosecutors. But once that video was leaked. Things got I interesting

Then some say this is going to get interesting. Yeah I hope so. I hope it get's real interesting. Because incidents of coverups happen all the time. Plus to me. Even if a good officer knows of wrong doing. But is afraid to report it because of being labeled a traitor to other cops is wrong.

So to me. It's about time all L.E are held personally accountable for their actions. Because what they do can destroy a person's life. So tell me with a straight face. That their power has never been used against innocient AMERICANS with the sole intent of doing so.

One word there on a national level Flynn

Cops hate people videoing them and have even threaten people for doing it. A lot of corruption since people have been able to do so. Because of cell phones has come to light. It extremely distrubing. Yet your identified as a cop hater for even saying this happens. Yep this has gotten interesting already.

As much as alot hate being told this. They are public CIVIL servants of whatever city, county or state hired them. NOT some sort of PARAMILITARY organization.

They are civilian L.E.O.s. But man you want to see some get pissed when you say this. Try it one time. But make sure your recording. Otherwise if they get mad enough. You just might get a ride. For their interpretation of breaking some law.

What happened to General Michael Flynn. I'm just courious does anyone think that those that perpetrated this horrendous act against an innocient man. Who pleaded guilty because these so called L.E. officials threaten to next go after his son if he did not plead guilty.

What about L.E.officials being held personally as well as criminally if in fact they did attempt to cover up the murder of that innocient black man jogging. Then only after video was leaked. They had a change of heart. Thank GOD for cell cameras

Oh well taxpayers will pay for their deeds of corruption. If there is not reform done to this non accountability.

I'd be intersted if anyone thinks that they should not be held personally accountable both in personal lawsuits and criminal court. Because I'd find it interesting who thinks that L.E.O.s should have immunity for their actions. Just the American taxpayers should be be held accountable for their actions.

Btw the crap alot of officers over on another well known gun forum. You'd not believe the B.S. they were saying about this innocient black man jogging. It just goes beyond me that these people saying this garbage. Are even police officers.

Those comments is another reason ALL L.E.O.s should be held personally accountable for their actions. Enough of hiding behind a badge. But LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES say if they are held accountable. It would hinder them doing their job. One word REALLY.
:roll: :lol:

Just learn and follow the same laws they enact upon Americans and they will not have any problems. L.E.Os not knowing the laws they are hired to enforce is a whole other discussion.

So call me a cop hater for wanting common sense reform. I don't care. Which I'm not.

Yep this is going to get interesting alright if the SCOTUS does the right thing.
RANGER AIRBORNE, BLACK TEAM, FIREMEDIC, NRA BENEFACTOR
In the Government's/Elitist eye's I'm a Terrorist for believing in the Constitution and taking an oath to defend it instead of POLITICAL LEADERS
dammitgriff
Posts: 928
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am

Post by dammitgriff »

Qualified immunity is unconstitutional, full stop.
It (the Constitution) does not confer separate rights and privileges on one group of citizens over another.
R/Griff
User avatar
Skeezix
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:27 pm
Location: Jax, FL

Post by Skeezix »

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” ― George Orwell, Animal Farm
User avatar
Firemedic2000
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:01 pm
Location: Tampa Bay

Post by Firemedic2000 »

That may be true. But there is only one animal in this match and in the Constitution and that's man.

Good quote though. It's kinda like the quote about Colts.

God made man, but COLT made all men equal.
RANGER AIRBORNE, BLACK TEAM, FIREMEDIC, NRA BENEFACTOR
In the Government's/Elitist eye's I'm a Terrorist for believing in the Constitution and taking an oath to defend it instead of POLITICAL LEADERS
Post Reply