Supreme Court Considering Challenges to Qualified Immunity | Cato Daily Podcast
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 сер 2024
- April 30, 2020
Supreme Court Considering Challenges to Qualified Immunity
Featuring Jay Schweikert and Caleb O. Brown
The Supreme Court has been reluctant to take a case challenging qualified immunity, a doctrine that protects police from the consequences of violating Americans’ rights. That may change soon, according to Cato’s Jay Schweikert.
You can support the Cato Daily Podcast and the Cato Institute by becoming a Podcast Sponsor.
Learn more: www.cato.org/m...
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #1 НАЧАЛО ПУТЕШЕСТВИЯ [Новый сезон] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/380Q7gLWGvk/mqdefault.jpg)
1967 to present, QUALIFIED IMMUNITY says " YOU CAN'T SUE CITY HALL " and opens the door for judicial & police malfeasance, NO JUSTICE NO PEACE!
ABOLISH QUALIFIED IMMUNITY COMPLETELY AND LET COPS PAY FOR MALPRACTICE INSURANCE LIKE DOCTORS, AT A POINT THEY WILL NOT BE ABEL TO AFFORD IT WHEN THEY ARE CONFIRMED A HIGH RISK VIOLATOR OF THE PEOPLES RIGHTS BY NUMEROUS VIOLATIONS AND THEN NO INSURANCE NO LONGER A COP.
I am sure that the FOP could get insurance for police officers just like they have their own unemployment insurance. Also, the state taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for someone's illegal indiscretions. That includes all publically paid employees from the US Congress to the Post Office employees. Everyone should be held accountable. Period.
It is the correct free market solution!
Makes sense
"Qualified Imunity protects state actors from liability even when they break the law." In other words, double standard. The guy arresting you for breaking the law can break the law. If that doesn't breed contempt nothing will.
All it breeds is a total separation if the Government from the People.
The People have the Final Say in the outcome.
Any judge that hides the law as such from a jury is also liable.
It is immoral, unethical, and in violation of the Constitution
Unless the actors violate a constitutional right an it can be proved, they get away with lots. There is a guy now trying to change the law due to what cops did to him. Horrible story...
@@macgyveratlarge2133 you are kidding, right? What you said doesn't happen. Only your last sentence is correct. But cops are 'above the law'
@@azleenie1 cases and cases of this abuse.
No it doesn't. It protects officers from liability when they don't break the law for actions deemed objectively reasonable by the courts. Can or should an EMT be sued personally for doing his job in the course of life-saving CPR by inadvertently cracking someone's ribs in the process? Would that create a chilling effect which resulted in thousands of deaths if they didn't have reasonable protections? Should firefighters be held personally liable for using water to put out a house fire you created and the water damage destroyed the electrical system in your home? Would that create a chilling effect if they did? Qualified Immunity ONLY protects officers from acting WITHIN the purview of their duties. If they are found criminally liable for anything then they LOSE their qualified immunity and it opens them up to CIVIL liabilities. I am all for helping the courts to better clearly define the law so that bad actors within law enforcement lose that privilege but removing it altogether would have disastrous consequences for society. Nobody would EVER do their job.... its not worth it.
PROTEST ABOLISH QUALIFIED IMMUNITY ALL IMMUNITY and stop them from investigating themselves and being over the body cam/ video footage 🙏
Qualified immunity is moronic and criminal in itself. The judges who came up with this should be imprisoned. Qualified immunity fosters lawlessness, it's ridiculous.
😳"❓If Clearly Established Law is needed to sue police How was the first Lawsuit ever sussefful without having Clearly Established Law❓
The abolishment of Qualified Immunity will have cops resigning and retiring in droves. Abolishment of police unions will also raise the stakes and serve to weed out the established bad actors and deter those who wish to join and remain on the force. Every law enforcement officer, if sworn and regardless of rank or duty, MUST be required to carry a minimum of 5 million dollars of personal liability insurance in order to qualify for and remain on the job. Any and all judgements against an officer are to be paid from that policy and supplemented by the police retirement fund if the payout exceeds the officer’s coverage. This will serve to reign in the temptation of overreach of the “good cop” and to price the bad actors out of the career field when departments and courts fail to act and remove them from their ranks.
Damn good idea!
Qualified Immunity is Sovereign Immunity on steroids.
Judicial Immunity and Prosecutorial Immunity needs to be lumped in with it.
The Constitution is "clearly established law" but instead you put in it's place clearly unestablished law
Wouldnt need it if the LOSER in any case paid ALL LEGAL EXPENSES of the court & winner.. No lawyers would take weak cases to make a few $$.
Goes against Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) We The People are Sovereign and Marbury v. Madison (1803) Any law that is Repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.
Police must be looking at all of this and wondering how long that this practice will continue.
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS ACTUALLY AN ILLEGAL USE OF THE TITLE OF NOBILITY ACT, WHICH HAS BEEN ILLEGAL IN THIS NATION SINCE DAY-ONE.
GRANTING AN EMPLOYEE IMMUNITY FROM CRIMES THAT THE PEOPLE ARE DENIED THAT SAME PROTECTION.
NO PLOYEE SHOULD EVER BE GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM CRIMINAL ACTS, BUT THE POPULATION AT LARGE, ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
EMPLOYEES WERE NEVER GRANTED RIGHTS, AUTHORITY OR POWER TO STAND SUPERIOR TO THE PEOPLE.
IF POLICE ARE NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR CRIMINAL ACTS, THEN TWE THE PEOPLE WILL STAND UP, AND BECOME THE LAW, AND WILL HOLD THE CRIMINALS FULLY ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES!
WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT SERVANTS OR SLAVES TO OUR HIRED HELP, THEY WILL NIT BE ALLOWED TO PLAY OUR MASTER, WE WILL BEGIN SHOOTING THESE EMPLOYEES ASSUMING TO ACT AS IF WE MUST BOW TO THEM, WE HAVE NO CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO BECOME SUBSERVIENT TO ANYBODY!
I REFUSE TO BOW DOWN TO ANY DAMN EMPLOYEE..NO MORE!
ABUSE ME I WILL OPEN FIRE AND KILL YOU!
MY RIGHTS ARE ALWAYS SUPERIOR TO ANY DAMN EMPLOYEE!
My understanding is that qualified immunity does not apply to cases of CRIMINAL wrongdoing, only civil suits brought against their employers. Source: The Civil Rights Lawyer - see his channel.
👂❓How did the "VERY FIRST" Qualified immunity case Ever Become Sussefful❓Where there was no "CLEARLY ESTABLISHED" LAW❓❓❓❓❓
It has proven to be virtually impossible to find two similar cases in effect, rendering any challenge to qualified immunity useless.
What about all the winning cases where it was found that the law was clearly established? Toss those out and pretend they didn't win?
That's why the facts in each case has to be broken down into bite-size nuggets so identical or similar enough nuggets can be found in previous cases where they were recognised as Constitutional violations
SCOTUS also needs to walk back the decisions that state that law enforcement does not have a duty to “protect and service” OR rule that they can no longer use the phrase as “advertisement” on their vehicles or in other places.
Ps. Or better yet rule in favor of the 2nd amendment valid as written (shall pass no law) and we will take care of ourselves.
Not sure what decisions you are talking about but there is a general duty to protect the public at large - it's just that there is no duty to protect specific individuals (unless there are facts that show special knowledge of a need for protection).
To rule otherwise would mean any house that is broken in to would make police liable rather than just those houses where police saw a break in happening (or were notified that it was happening) but did nothing about it.
The police cannot be a personal body guard for everyone in a jurisdiction - the numbers make that impossible.
@@2Truth4Liberty You appear to be a lawyer or police (with an opposite name?). Hope you find God so you don't receive eternal punishment with the rest of them. Lawyers are the opposite of truth.
@@2Truth4Liberty Police, judges are custody child kidnappers, fine machines, bill collectors. US police arrest 8x more than Europe, Russia, China - to generate business for evil lawyers+ bribes.
@@PeopleHealthTru I am not an attorney (though I am a lawyer in the sense of "one studied in the law").
You sound scarred. Hope you heal.
@@2Truth4Liberty unless you're Walmart.
There is a new Colorado court case concerning Qualified Immunity...see the "Lackluster" channel on UA-cam. This will change everything and should spread like wildfire in other states "Supreme courts" across America.
No it's a bill passed by Colorado's legislature and signed into law by its governor
Speaking from today, I guess not. The Supreme court does not want to Reexamine Qualified Immunity;Tragically, the time was perfect for this change, but they refused. After seeing this, I need to ask how is this a Democracy if the Justices are ignoring what the people are calling to change?
Gross abuse of federal power. By holding government officials - those who are essentially trained and swear to uphold the constitution as a duty of their role in society - to a lower standard and empowering them to violate individual rights is unconstitutional. The Court must overturn this outrageous abuse of power and protect individual human rights. If not, I plead with the international community and international lawyers around the world to step in the gap and hold the United States accountable.
Abolish it
Doesn't qualified immunity only apply to the first officer who commits said violation of rights and all of the rest are on the hook? Wasn't there only a couple dozen actual 1983 cases for 50 years until they added lawyer fees. As soon as they did cases started pliling up. How come nobody cares about judges and lawyers getting absolute immunity?
In my opinion the law enforcement officer should receive exactly what he gave in excessive force
yep! eye for an eye.
Case law isn't law at all - it is smoke and mirrors to legalize unlawful acts. Legal and lawful are two different things and until we return to the rule of law instead of allowing attorneys to redefine things the abuses will continue.
Case law is basically precedent. All this comes from the Talmud. That shouldn't surprise anyone, because some of the most repugnant, dishonest, and filthy maxims of modern law come from that perverted book.
@@Greyswyndir It is a violation of the Constitution and their oath to make case law. Constitution only authorizes a legislature to create law. Judges make opinions, many are evil for money, agenda.
How is that the folks, that are hired from the people, who work for the people and paid for by the people are allowed to rule unquestionably over the people? This country has lost it's way....
The more power you give them the more you corrupt them.
they were always corrupt
Being a police officer being a school teacher being a pastor you're still accountable for your actions. Nobody is above the law of the constitution.
Qualified immunity is it's own admission of guilt . Therefore disqualifying the agent for immunity, given that you had to commit a crime in order to get the immunity
Some Prosecutors and judges abuse qualified immunity too
I would like a middle of the road approach. First time anything substantially similar happens and the individual can be protected by qualified immunity but the liability rests on the employer/policy maker, but that that clearly sets precedence. If a substantially similar case comes along, then the individual can be liable for violations occurring after that precedence has been set. This will allow for police officers and officials to not be required to have the legal scholarly mind of a constitutional law attorney and to make an honest mistake. If precedence is well established, then they could try to argue in front of the jury that their employer didn't train them on said precedence, but the complainant can have their day in court.
Mabye these judges should go undercover and put themselves in situations where their civil rights are being violated and see if they feel the same way.
this is why judicial activism is terrifying. Leave legislation matter to congress.
Congress is included in the immunity..And NO Constitution right to redress exist on the floor of the Congress..
When state qualified immunity laws are based on the officer's state of mind during the incident(s) that gave rise to the claim is invoked, the state officer - or federal/joint task force officer in an action pursuant to the FTCA - the officer can defeat the claim by testilying in the claimant's criminal trial or his lawyers could do so in their motion to dismiss
Every single cop should be very very worried the video of the police union representative threatening the public is actually going to be used in one of the arguments police who are not held accountable or no longer police they’re criminals
The way it's written is good they JUST DON'T go by the law the way it's written, but EVERYONE Else that goes to work HAS to be responsible for what you do on the clock, why wouldn't they!!??
we hope and pray the supreme court see clearly this time .
The United States of America: “Live as we say or die.”
P.S.
“The rules do not and should not apply to us because we need to break the law to enforce other laws.” That’s exactly the problem - double standards in the name of “public safety.”
Funny thing is, the Magna Carta was written with this in mind: the King also had to live by the laws because they knew if he didn’t, his power would be limitless..
Our Founding Fathers were well-aware of the Magna Carta and drafted the Constitution with the Magna Carta charter in-mind.
The Supreme Court will understand this-we can only hope.
Many of our laws are intentionally created to be ambiguous, QI wins nearly every time as the law is not clearly defined.
"We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final."
--Justice Robert Jackson
Getting the Supreme Court to reverse a previous Supreme Court decision is like pulling teeth with slippery fingers.
I noticed that this podcast never mentioned that while qualified immunity protects _individuals_ from liability, it does not protect the state itself. So a person can still sue the city for a cop's actions, and can be found to have had their rights violated, thus establishing precedent. This is why nearly every such case is settled out of court. This is also why the police never seem to find that officers did anything wrong--doing so would be admitting that they were liable when the victim sues them.
Of course, this means that the state actor suffers no punishment except whatever their own organization metes out, which in the case of police is usually nothing, or paid suspension.
Please where is Q.I. in the constitution?
Pride is the judge of all discrepancies and all lose involved.
Catch 22, & circular reasoning. Clearly established can't be established unless a courageous court makes the decision for the first case.
Modification of qualified immunity is sorely needed. We also need the court to issue rulings to curb civil asset forfeiture abuse. Both of these issues contribute greatly to public distrust and contempt of police.
Civil asset forfeiture for sure
qualified immunity ONLY APPLIES to civil cases. if there is a criminal case, the officer can be sentenced to death. nothing changes.
problem is, the DA or CA under charging or over charging the officer.
ie: they show up and shoot a man. clear case of murder. the Da will charge them with 1st degree murder only (which means he preplanned it KNOWING the officer did not plan the killing). in this case, evidence proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that he IS guilty of murder, but murder is not on the table for discussion, only 1st deg, premeditated. of course, the officer is found innocent of that and cannot be charged again under double jeopardy.
THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
is where the problem lies. blue scratching blue back. thin blue line.
i have police in my family. good people. however, the system protecting them encourages bad behavior to generate revenue for the state.
"we got ya man..."
Impassioned dissents? How can you believe they have any feelings besides superiority and anger?
Misfeasance in public office (1703)
If we examine this case you will see:
1 That the officer could lawfully stop the person involved
2. By detaining him and preventing him from voting, he deprived him from casting his vote.
3. In the age when there were restrictions in the right to vote, the PC altered the result of the election, when 1 vote could effect the result.
4. This deprived those standing for election from winning and could have given the person elected an unfair advantage
5. The person elected vote, would have an effect on everyone in the constituency and the country, The roll on effect
6. The Constable 's legal stop, escalated the effect on other persons not directly involved.
7.In addition the Constable action, also placed a burden on his superiors for not training him correctly or adequately supervising him and they were vicariously liable and could be included in any suit
8 Therefore, the roll on effect caused a loss or injury to many non immediately effected persons
If a Trustee operates outside of Good Faith, scope and jurisdiction, depriving Rights under color of law and in dishonor of Oath the Trustee shall lose Qualified Immunity.
End qualified immunity and help stop racism and assault !!! No one should be protected from breaking the law !!!
Relevant as ever
Law Enforcement should never have immunity from prosecution. They are not any better than any person in our great country. The very stance of this immunity is one of master and slave.
Started listening to this now, not realizing it is 2 years old.
From what I know now, nothing has been done to correct any of it.
Someone correct me on this. Are the issues still before the court?
Nothing will change.
DirtyDigger I think that too. I hope it will change but have no faith in the Injustice system to sort itself out.
Then there needs to be a movement underway to alter the supreme court, through packing it, along with term & age limits. It's absurd we have to live under conditions imposed by a small # of unelected, unimpeachable judges, many long dead.
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY needs to end!
@@dirtydigger3218 Change.org? know a lawyer to write something up? I'll sign.
Giving extra rights based on employment is unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment
No-one is immune to violating my rights. I do not need the governments protection, nor are they obliged to protect the citizens, even when it is court ordered, per the Supreme Court. Therefore no citizen is obliged to grovel under the statutes set forth by government. Gods law is the law that says harm no- one,anything more than that set forth by government is unjust and unconstitutional.
Next, we need to find out how it's possible that every jury in the US happens to find police officers innocent of everything. Think Kelly Thomas for example.
They are afraid of retribution by the police. Why stick your neck out just for Justice?
A CITIZEN LIES TO A COP AND IS ARRESTED, A COP LIES IN COURT, GETS CAUGHT BUT IN MOST INSTANCES IS NOT ARRESTED AND ONLY GETS A SCOLDING FROM THE JUDGE AS HIS PUNISHMENT FOR LYING. HOW JUST IS THAT?
Take it away from the police and the crime will drop.
In 1703 a High Court Justice ruled that a Police Constable committed Misfeasance In Public Office, creating a tort. As this tort existed before Independence, I believe that it may be enforceable in the USA. Take a look at this case, as it established that law officers can be held liable! In fact it goes further, as it also ruled that even if the act was lawful if it was likely to cause loss or harm to another person, then the officer would be liable!
Misfeasance in Public Office
Misfeasance or misconduct in public office Misfeasance in public office is a particularly serious matter. This is where a public body, an individual in public office or a public servant acts unlawfully, knows that they are acting unlawfully and does so knowing that his or her actions are likely to cause loss or harm to another person.
Misfeasance in public office is a cause of action in the civil courts of England and Wales and certain Commonwealth countries. It is an action against the holder of a public office, alleging in essence that the office-holder has misused or abused their power. The tort can be traced back to 1703 when Chief Justice Sir John Holt decided that a landowner could sue a police constable who deprived him of his right to vote. The tort was revived in 1985 when it was used so that French turkey producers could sue the Ministry of Agriculture over a dispute that harmed their sales.
Take my case
DOCTORS DONT GET IT = SO WHY THE POLICE ? ?
A government agency can prevent you from voting for a particular political party and can be protected by Qualified Immunity
Trustees require Qualified Immunity to protect their lawful duties. However the Trustees loose Qualified Immunity if the Trustee operates outside of Good Faith, scope and jurisdiction, depriving Rights under color of law andin dishonor of Oath.
Qualified immunity was not a bill passed by congress so the public had no say in its' passing. Qualified immunity allows cops to break the law whether on purpose or not. QI was dreamed up by some corrupt court officials to protect cops from being sued. It is almost impossible to fight QI. QI means cops don't have to pay fines and judgements when they make mistakes against the public (you and me). The one who pays is the local, county and state governments with our tax dollars.
In the past police were part of the community they knew and cared about the people they protected. That is hard to do now, but police should be held to a higher standard because they can; throw you in jail, take your car, beat you up, shoot you with a gun, if they find exception to you or your attitude or just looking to give some one a hard time. I know it is wrong for any one to be able to terrorize people or kill with impunity,do the courts? Maybe they want to decrease the excess population
Here's another standard we could use: the worst treatment of a suspect by officers must be used with every suspect. So if a cop shoots an unarmed black poor suspect, they must also shoot all unarmed rich white suspects, latino suspects, asian suspects and all other black suspects ... everyone? You would see this nonsense stopped immediately. I'm joking in this example of course, but it makes my point. By the way, the only time I've had a gun pulled on me was by a cop. I'm a white male. I was driving10 miles over the limit. I saw the cop's lights come on behind me, so I pulled over, rolled down my window and was searching for my insurance. When I looked up, I had a gun in my face with a cop yelling at me. Cops are too untrustworthy to carry guns. Kids skipping school, jaywalking? Cops with guns ... this insanity must stop. Keep SWAT teams with guns etc but regular cops enforcing the law everyday on the street should NOT CARRY GUNS.
Continued inaction by the Supreme Court to consider whether qualified immunity is a means to allow government actors in all positions of "authority" to commit crimes in the name of the state to allow certain persons employed by the state to ignore and not suffer responsibility for their actions that are contrary to allowing similar actions by other non-government employed citzens makes the Supreme Court a laughing stock with respect to freedom and justice. Using the "strictly similar" standard to control whether an action should be a reason to deny, without consideration of the circumatances involved that allow state employees to willingly and intentionally violate the law that anyone else, without question, would be held accountable and responsible for means that the law is an artifice to punish only some while others are protected. The law is, therefore, only for citizens who don't choose to be employed by the state.
Fair? I think not.
I do not think that all cops are bad, or that even most cops are bad, but qualified immunity is a completely wrong idea in every way. Every cop that is present when someone's rights are violated need to be held to account with their own money, not the tax payer's money. Err on the side of defending rights and understand that there are people who aren't going to be that cooperative in the defense of an individual's rights. Extend this to all executive branch officials at least on the local and state level and prosecutors' offices in all locales. It needs to be a federal law that prosecutorial misconduct will automatically result in disbarring and jail time upon conviction. When the corruption is allowed to go under the radar, it will spread until it's too late to contain.
Qualified immunity is a terrible idea. Every right that the police violate are clearly established rights. Once it goes to court once and there is case law, it is clearly established by that court decision, but it shouldn't have ever gotten that far. It should be that cops should not be allowed to lie and that cops must know that they have to articulable suspicion at the time they detain someone and detain someone to develop that suspicion by making up a story among other cops who weren't even present at the time the cop made the detention. The first amendment through 10th amendments and beyond that are being violated daily by cops who believe that they're doing what is right. It is because they have zero incentive to take investigative steps to determine if someone is actually violating a law because of qualified immunity. The cops have no incentive to uphold their oaths to defend the Constitution with qualified immunity and will almost always favor a complainant, even if they never spoke to the complainant. The qualified immunity thing basically puts the people whose rights are violated in the place of being financially liable for lawsuits against those that violate the same people's rights. These are arguments that would likely win in the Supreme Court to narrow or eliminated qualified immunity. Better get your body cams on cops and turn them on and never mute the audio under any circumstances, as well as your dash cams to make sure you don't lie to secure a ticket and get someone's ID. Go after the crimes with victims and serve the people, not yourselves.
All cops are bad. If there was a good cop he would report the bad cop and the bad cop would be fired but that's not what's happening in today's world is it. All cops are bad every single one of them. Stop fooling yourself. It is a culture of corruption they call themselves the blue line gang I call them blue Isis, because they are nothing but terrorists in this country.
Police officers should be held accountable for their crimes while policing. I'm so tired of having my tax dollars not only pay bad cops to police us, but when they break the law we pay for it again because every lawsuit goes straight to our pocketbooks and not to theirs.
So... they not only bottlenecked the process, they logjammed it as well.
is about time. Abolish qualified immunity for ALL and police unions.
Pay the cops well and make them post a bond. Things will change in a day.
The court does not have the authority to write law. That is up to the Congress, Senate and the president. The courts only uphold the law
And yet they have. The original statute says nothing of qualified immunity. In fact if QI had been in effect when the law was first written, all the Southern states officials would have been violating black's rights all the time, and the law would have been empty, toothless and useless.
Qualified immunity is unconstitutional what ever happened to equal justice under the law the lady holding
The scales is blindfolded not blind she and we the people see what's happening even the blind can see the unequal injustice what the government is doing to the people the cops are out of control due to the fact of qualified immunity
Another man dies and again we have violence in the streets of American cities. Thank you qualified immunity and many other unjust laws/rules!
This law is the one you need to attack.
@@doomnotron protest, protest, not riot
@@leongardner710 it's now December 2020 and all these protests did was draw agents provocateurs committing mayhem in order to justify police riots
talk talk talk talk talk talk - business as usual - talk talk talk talk talk talk - business as usual - talk talk talk talk talk talk - nothing changes
Case law is the dumbest way to judge a case by case basis, the judge can just say to the attorneys " I'll deny your motions to dismiss due to the case law you gave me wasnt even close to the case before us". And that's his personal interpretation which is man law, not real law.
They should have to watch 24 hours of what they have done
Trick question what does shall not infringe mean lol...
Abolishing qualified immunity outright is foolish. The problem is that each incident has special circumstances and, almost by default, prohibits making a standard for the law. It's a slippery slope that land us in a society where no one will join law enforcement, or police will simply not engage with anyone they're arresting.
Not true; if the cops followed their own procedures and the law, then they have a legitimate defense even if it got FUBAR.
QI as it sits now allows them to clearly violate peoples' rights, and get away with it over and over.
@@GeeTrieste If wishes were fishes we'd all live in riches.
People like you keep thinking that everyone should or will according to the rules or your will. Human beings are not fixed targets, and YES, even cops fall under htat umbrella.
If you don't treat people like they are sentient beings they will rebel. Plain and simple.
The thumbs down for this video must be cops who think they are above the law!!!
A "sleeper issue" lol.
End Qualified Immunity.
Has Colorado repealed Qualified Immunity??
Is this the start?
Imunity should never be granted to anyone
Need to take it away looks like it doesn’t work for citizens
Too bad they waited until the last minute then threw it off the docket.
Another exception to the law that protect the crooked cops, right?
QI protect the authorities from the public and their misunderstanding of the law especially the minority community ???
Qualified immunity should be a very limited option. Those charged with higher responsibilities, should be held to a higher standard, with more grace. No illegal activities should be permitted. Crime should not pay! You should not be able to shoot someone on 5th avenue and get away with it. Or storm the Capital!
We must challenge immunity at every turn. Until it falls like a confederate statue
The change in the wind? Video.
Being able to watch cops decend on prone handcuffed suspects.
Being able to watch zoning inspectors elbow into private homes to "verify" facts on a renovation permit.
To watch cops without warrant toss a house - including attic.
It's changed public opinion & the zeitgeist has shifted.
End QI. Now -
No Living Person has Qualified Immunity. It's only a piece of paper.. Think carefully
Leads the victim with the word “revenge”.
You always have some way of justifying why they can't figure it out but you never bring up the difference between legal and lawful this is where the corruption lies and you also never bring up the corruption in the language that the court use American Sign Language and dog Latin in the documents which loftily can only be written in English there's something more to this and it seems to be intentional
Im telling you no good cop would put theirselves in that position . Its , its own admission of guilt. You have to have commited a crime to need immunity. If you commited the crime you cant qualify for immunity
The police need to be drastically demilitarized. Most community policing can be done without looking like a soldier. When you militarize the force you give men the belief that they get to control. Then you add to that they aren’t even taught citizens rights and you have a disaster. Followed by the courts telling them it’s ok to violate rights as long as they don’t mean it. It’s all a huge boondoggle and people are really getting hurt.
TIME TO PROTEST AGAIN
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, except if you are a cop. End immunity. All settlements to be taken from police pension funds not the taxpayer.
Qualified immunity should be abolish all together.
END QUALIFIED IMMUNITY PERIOD!!!!!!
Rich people money.
They definitely shouldn't have qualified immunity all that is is an incentive to violate people's rights and do whatever they want to do you have to have chicks and balances even over those ones in charge of policing
BS. The Court isn't even taking the case right now.
Cato lying again
Praise God. Give President Trump full immunity. He deserves it. God bless! 🙏🙏🙏🙏