I think that doing their job correctly, as trained, and following best practices, should be a valid defense for doctors. If you are familiar with the history o

I think that doing their job correctly, as trained, and following best practices, should be a valid defense for doctors. If you are familiar with the history of qualified immunity, you may know that there have been multiple standards over the decades. For example, consider the state of qualified immunity at the time of Pierson v.Ray [1]. Do you think you should be able to sue a cop (as an individual) for enforcing a law that is on the books, acting in good faith, because the law is determined afterwards to be unconstitutional? They arent constitutional scholars, and even if they were, they wouldn't get it right all the time. It is crazy to hold them liable, especially personally, for bad laws. As I said originally, "Qualified immunity needs a new standard, but it is necessary." cchttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray