Supreme Court says police shootings are momentary 'seizures' under 4th Amendment

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Victims of a police shooting who evade immediate arrest have nonetheless been "seized" under the Fourth Amendment and can challenge the use of force in court, the U.S. Supreme Court said Thursday.

The 5-3 decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, affirmed constitutional protections for "the right of the people to be secure in their persons" and dealt a setback to law enforcement groups seeking to limit legal liability for officers.

Roxanne Torres of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was shot multiple times by police in 2014 as she sped off in her Toyota FJ Cruiser while experiencing methamphetamine withdrawal. She survived and was later apprehended but sued the officers claiming the shooting amounted to an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

Lower courts rejected her claims in favor of the officers, saying that because she was not immediately stopped or arrested it was not a "seizure." Roberts, in reversing those decisions, explained "the officers seized Torres for the instant that the bullets struck her."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/supreme-court-says-police-shootings-are-momentary-seizures-under-4th-amendment/ar-BB1eXrsI?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=DELLDHP

[FBaggins]

1. Interesting split on the conservative side of the court

Should make for entertaining reading.

[WHITT]

2. But

can challenge the use of force in court

Not if you're DEAD.

[The Roux Comes First]

3. What, Nuance Isn't Dead Yet?

I suppose reasoning and cogitation may get a reprieve now, too? We can hope.

[lagomorph777]

4. Complex case; glad it may have made a dent in cop crime impunity.