3 ms·
The article offer a good summary of what qualified immunity is and why it is a problem. Ordinary people ... are expected to follow the law. If they violate som
by solidsnack9000 6y ago
The article offer a good summary of what qualified immunity is and why it is a problem.
Ordinary people ... are expected to follow the law. If they violate someone else’s legal rights, they can be sued and required to pay for the injuries they’ve caused.
Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials are held to a much lower standard. They can be held accountable only insofar as they violate rights that are “clearly established” in light of existing case law. This standard shields law enforcement, in particular, from innumerable constitutional violations each year. In the Supreme Court’s own words, it protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
- deathgrips 6y agoThis actually prevents case law from being established. If it's plainly evident that tasing pregnant women for refusing to sign paper is bad, but no high profile case has established it, no lawyer will pursue such a case because there will be no payout. It's a mechanism for cops to do what they want and face no civil consequences.
- tanderson92 6y agoIt's actually worse than that, if you can believe that that is possible: https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=law_fac_pubs https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&c...
- thephyber 6y agoNo payout is not always a problem. Civic organizations like EFF and ACLU push cases frequently to establish exactly those types of precedent. Granted, their resources are far more limited than all profit-seeking civil attorneys.