Lawyer here! (Not your lawyer, blah blah blah.) The issue in this case isn't whether Mr. McKesson is actually liable for the conduct that injured the police of

Lawyer here! (Not your lawyer, blah blah blah.) The issue in this case isn't whether Mr. McKesson is actually liable for the conduct that injured the police officer. It's whether or not the police officer even has a valid claim that Mr. McKesson could be liable if all the facts claimed are true, which is very much in dispute. The actual facts of the case haven't even been established yet. This is a case about what we call a standard Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) Motion to Dismiss. First-year law school stuff. I don't think it's worth reading too much into this case. Yeah, it's the Fifth Circuit, which is packed with idiot judges hand-picked by the Federalist Society. But as to its importance in the grand scheme of things, the "truthout" website is making a mountain out of molehill IMO. As ideologically extreme publications do. Another commenter pointed at the Scotus blog which I think is a far fairer (if much drier) report.