If I understand correctly, LLCs don't protect against personal negligence and unlawful behavior, in either criminal or civil court. The QI standard seems to go

If I understand correctly, LLCs don't protect against personal negligence and unlawful behavior, in either criminal or civil court. The QI standard seems to go beyond that in requiring specific case law about the specific act of negligence (creating a chicken-and-egg problem for plaintiffs). It seems to me we have to fix all of these things. QI has to be disestablished as a legal doctrine or at least curtailed to be in line with how other professions get treated in good-faith doctrine. The Congress has to act to establish federal police use of force standards, require the DOJ to enforce them, strip police of military assets, and outlaw police union action on use of force matters and related disciplinary actions. And the states have to act to provide independent internal affairs prosecutors who (as you mention) don't hold a conflict of interest any time they pursue criminal charges against police. Maybe in this case the SC acted in a calculated way to spur the Congress to act and allow it to be scrutinized in an election year, or felt the case was otherwise unsuitable. But the SC will have to face QI later anyway. The Thomas dissent (https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061520zor_f2bh.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061520zor_f2..., search for "Baxter") lays out the reasons why.