General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAppeals court rules cops should have qualified immunity in violent takedowns
A federal appeals court on Tuesday granted so-called qualified immunity to Louisiana officers who were accused of forcing an unarmed Black man to the ground and beating him into compliance, a case that experts say exemplifies how difficult it can be for victims of police brutality to overcome the controversial doctrine in court.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a 2019 US District Court decision that said the officers violated the man's constitutional rights during the encounter and the qualified immunity defense could not protect them in court, clearing the way for the case to go to trial.
"This case is an example of just how stringent the 'clearly established law' standard in the qualified immunity defense can be," said Alexander Reinert, a professor at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University who authored a recent study on qualified immunity for police officers.
Qualified immunity, a federal doctrine that protects officers accused of violating the Constitutional rights of citizens in the performance of their duties, was established by the Supreme Court in 1967. It shields state and local officials from being sued in civil court unless they violate someone's "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights." In order to prove this in court, a victim has to put forward a prior case with nearly identical facts that a court ruled as unconstitutional.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/appeals-court-rules-cops-should-have-qualified-immunity-in-violent-takedowns/ar-BB1gSYQv
The Magistrate
(95,255 posts)It boils down to saying law cannot adjust to circumstances, that the dead hand binds the present, even though social norms have grown quite different.
Faux pas
(14,690 posts)And