3 ms·

I guess in this case I'd kind of agree? I fully believe police officers should know the law and act within it. But it's certainly not their job to judge if a la

by dx034 4y ago

I guess in this case I'd kind of agree? I fully believe police officers should know the law and act within it. But it's certainly not their job to judge if a law might be unconstitutional. That's what courts are for. And if a lower judge thinks a law might be unconstitutional, they also cannot just repeal it but instead send it to a higher court. So if someone is in breach of a law, police should act. The case discussed in the article is very different as police officers just believed they acted within the law. That should certainly not be enough.

Someone 4y ago
Agree, but I would leave out that “kind of”. As an example, there’s Roe v. Wade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade), which was partly overruled in 1992, “allowing states to implement abortion restrictions that apply during the first trimester of pregnancy” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey), and fully in 2022 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Hea...) As a police officer in 1950, being informed of an, according to then current state law, illegal abortion, how on earth could you know what would happen later? Today, could you be sure that last ruling won’t be overturned again?
- komali2 4y ago
  This is where ACAB rhetoric comes into play. This is why cops aren't welcome at LGBT parades. People will debate, "oh, but what if a cop happens to live in a state that made gay marriage illegal again? And then they're told to arrest people that got publicly married at an LGBT rally? Shouldn't they 'just follow orders' rather than be held responsible for determining the constitutionality of a state re-banning gay marriage?" Isn't that such an interestingly insane question? Qualified immunity lets people walk around unironically debating whether "just following orders" should be a valid thing that cops get away with doing. As for the cop that "just follows orders" and arrests a newlywed gay couple in 2023 (an entirely feasible thing considering what's happening with women seeking healthcare in Texas), is that a Good Cop, or a Bad Cop?
kolanos 4y ago
Police officers take an oath to uphold the constitution. Maybe they should be versed on the basics, such as freedom of assembly, before they go around enforcing unconstitutional laws? That's the thing, for civilians ignorance of the law is no excuse. But for police ignorance of the law is not only expected, but it also protects them from civil litigation.

by dx034 4y ago

Someone 4y ago

Agree, but I would leave out that “kind of”. As an example, there’s Roe v. Wade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade), which was partly overruled in 1992, “allowing states to implement abortion restrictions that apply during the first trimester of pregnancy” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey), and fully in 2022 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Hea...) As a police officer in 1950, being informed of an, according to then current state law, illegal abortion, how on earth could you know what would happen later? Today, could you be sure that last ruling won’t be overturned again?

komali2 4y ago
This is where ACAB rhetoric comes into play. This is why cops aren't welcome at LGBT parades. People will debate, "oh, but what if a cop happens to live in a state that made gay marriage illegal again? And then they're told to arrest people that got publicly married at an LGBT rally? Shouldn't they 'just follow orders' rather than be held responsible for determining the constitutionality of a state re-banning gay marriage?" Isn't that such an interestingly insane question? Qualified immunity lets people walk around unironically debating whether "just following orders" should be a valid thing that cops get away with doing. As for the cop that "just follows orders" and arrests a newlywed gay couple in 2023 (an entirely feasible thing considering what's happening with women seeking healthcare in Texas), is that a Good Cop, or a Bad Cop?

kolanos 4y ago

Police officers take an oath to uphold the constitution. Maybe they should be versed on the basics, such as freedom of assembly, before they go around enforcing unconstitutional laws? That's the thing, for civilians ignorance of the law is no excuse. But for police ignorance of the law is not only expected, but it also protects them from civil litigation.