Qualified Immunity In America: An Overview & Conversation [POLICYbrief]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 бер 2019
- Created by the Supreme Court in 1967, the legal doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from being sued even if they violate someone’s constitutional rights, as long as they are not violating what the Court calls "clearly established law."
Proponents of qualified immunity argue that it is necessary for police officers to perform their job without the fear of being sued. Critics say that qualified immunity offers too much protection for the police and lessens their accountability.
Two experts on qualified immunity, UCLA Law Professor Joanna Schwartz and Fairfax County Police Auditor Richard Schott, discuss its pros and cons in the fourth episode of our POLICYbrief series on criminal justice.
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.
Learn more about Joanna C. Schwartz: law.ucla.edu/faculty/faculty-...
Follow Joanna on Twitter: @JCSchwartzProf
JCSchwartzProf?la...
Learn more about Richard G. Schott: www.fairfaxcounty.gov/publica...
* * * * *
Related Links & Differing Views:
Notre Dame Law Review: “The Case Against Qualified Immunity”
ndlawreview.org/wp-content/upl...
LEB: “Qualified Immunity: How It Protects Law Enforcement Officers”
leb.fbi.gov/articles/legal-di...
The Yale Law Journal: “How Qualified Immunity Fails”
www.yalelawjournal.org/articl...
Notre Dame Law Review: “A Qualified Defense of Qualified Immunity”
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...
New York University Law Review: “Police Indemnification”
www.nyulawreview.org/wp-conte...
Amicus Brief: “Brief for Former Police Chiefs in Support of Petitioners”
www.scotusblog.com/wp-content...
"ignorance of the law is not an excuse" we've all been told that. it's time we hold people in power accountable.
Agreed. However, I hate that poorly applied apothegm. If ignorance of the law is not an excuse, and everybody should apparently know the law to that degree, then why do we even have lawyers?
Yes all people of power should be held accountable. People like Hunter Biden, Joe biden, John Kerry ect
Correction: Ignorance of the law is not an excuse-- FOR US !!! Government are allowed to know dick about the law and get away with everytime just by claiming they didn't know better.
Fuck all government workers.
Government workers are the bottom of the barrel when it comes to the population.
@@CrusaderDom3 r/woosh
Well, I was about to say almost the same thing but you beat me to it.
5:16 “That person being the law enforcement officer, should not have to defend what he or she did in the court room.” Yes he should, just like the rest of us do.
Joseph Doe yeah that guy is just an idiot
He said so much stupid shit. Closet fascist
He actually presented well-reasoned arguments. Simply because you disagree doesn't justify your prejudice.
Well the idea is in a life and death situation that split second thinking about is this constitutional will get the cop killed, or the suspect to get away. It makes sense logically but its effects need to be studied closely which is probably not happening.
@@FranzFerdinand76 some cops are better off dead
The fear of liability is the only thing that would prevent a law enforcement officer from violating your personal rights.
Uhh,no. That would be criminal charges dillwad
@@fastrope1556 Barely any officer is charged criminally.
@@fastrope1556 unfortunately they aren't charged criminally
@@dragonbane44 Then are you willing as a taxpayer to pay for insurance like doctors and lawyers have?
@@GiordanDiodato Are you ready for u as a taxpayer to have to pay for insurance for cops like doctors or lawyers have?
"it's not intended to be a roadblock" but that's exactly what it is. Intent and impact, big difference
No it's not
@@fastrope1556 If not, then why doesn't it apply to the citizens as well? The law covers EVERYONE. no one person is (supposed ) to be above it. That being the case, then QI should apply to citizens
They can claim what they like . But it's clear to me whats meant by this law created by by no elected body . And thats rights for them and none for us
That has no clue.
Revoke qualified immunity from ALL government employees, including Congress.
Analysis: Qualified Immunity is actually Obstruction of Justice".
Qualified immunity blocks judicial process where the government official is found innocent or guilty based on evidence.
Proof: It shields government officials of wrongdoing. It prevents accountability. If the government official is really innocent, then evidence should be able to prove it.
Legitimacy comes from: Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)
Illegitimacy comes from: Violation of SCOTUS oath to defend the US Constitution.
0:05 Used against Civil (Constutition) Rights workers.
0:14 "even if they violated the US Constitution"
0:20 "... if not violated clearly established law." (contradiction: Bill of Rights are the Established Laws)
Racist thinking and trying to impose a doctrine... on the US Constitution... contradictions arise in the wording.
Bill of Rights unclear to Surpreme Court Judges (get off the bench). Broken oath, to Defend and uphold the US Constitution.
Qualified immunity is actually Obstruction of Justice.
Why do police get into trouble. After seeing some audit videos, it becomes clear they don't know the law in most cases. Or they are pursuing personal agendas, racism. Or they don't really care about the law, only the paycheck at the end of the week. You can tell, they abuse their police powers and with no regard for the person they assault or laws protecting citizens.
Morale Compass, True North is Truth and Justice.
@@starbase51shiptestingfacil97 Police Officers are Citizens, and are entitled to the legal presumption of innocence. In other words, they do not need to "prove their Innocence" as you suggest. This is a concept that is antithetical to American Jurisprudence. The idea however that "Qualified Immunity" is inherited by the Police Officer from the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity is just the kind of legal crap that the Supreme Court has been vomiting for years. If for instance, you want to legalize abortion at any time, pass an actual Constitutional Amendment or Law that does just that, don't create a farcical interpretation of the Constitution by finding hidden modes, like the "Penumbra" of the Constitution. Like Sovereign Immunity, Qualified Immunity should not exist when the actions of the Government and/or it's Agents are visibly and clearly illegal.
@@TheMicroTrak I can tell you're just wasting my time... it's "innocent till proven guilty in a court of law" and they used Qualified Immunity so they can avoid going to court, because they are afraid they will be found guilty.
@@starbase51shiptestingfacil97 the same
@@starbase51shiptestingfacil97 the
My thought is:
If Police Conduct cannot be held to a "Higher Standard", an
"ARMED CITIZENRY" will
POLICE themselves AND The Police.
Literally the reason the second amendment was written.
@@seaeff6428 second amendment rights are rendered hollow if a cop can shoot you in the back for being armed without warning and get away with it under qualified immunity
As it is written in the constitution.
Jefferson used the Latin phrase in the following letter to James Madison:
Societies exist under three forms sufficiently distinguishable. 1. Without government, as among our Indians. 2. Under governments wherein the will of every one has a just influence, as is the case in England in a slight degree, and in our states in a great one. 3. Under governments of force: as is the case in all other monarchies and in most of the other republics. To have an idea of the curse of existence under these last, they must be seen. It is a government of wolves over sheep. It is a problem, not clear in my mind, that the 1st. condition is not the best. But I believe it to be inconsistent with any great degree of population. The second state has a great deal of good in it. The mass of mankind under that enjoys a precious degree of liberty and happiness. It has it's evils too: the principal of which is the turbulence to which it is subject. But weigh this against the oppressions of monarchy, and it becomes nothing. Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem. Even this evil is productive of good. It prevents the degeneracy of government, and nourishes a general attention to the public affairs. I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. - Jefferson to Madison, January 30, 17871
1.PTJ, 11:92-93. Letterpress copy available online at Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress. Transcription available at Founders Online.
Wish my job had qualified immunity, instead them telling us we're replaceable.
Unless you would like to volunteer to be shot at and die at any day, then you will probably be replaceable. The only jobs that have employees that can’t be replaceable are high intelligence and high risk. It is hard to find someone that is within a less than 1% of the population in terms of intelligence. It is also hard to find someone that will willing risk leaving their SO and child without a parent to go protect someone else. (There is a reason the army has a 4 year contract)
Leeeroy Jenkins Unless you hire people who want to harm others for the fun of it...
@@pm5206 Who do you think is going to write on their interview sheet, "I hate black people"? Most of the cops that killed unarmed people did it due to the training they were given. As for the rest of them, they made it very vocal on other outlets, such as social media. But back in the early 2000's bosses didn't make it a priority to check everyone's social media postings. Even in the early 2010's it wasn't a widespread practice.
@@LeeeroyJenkins yeah I'm sure Jeremy Shaver or George Floyd were real dangers to society huh. Intresting how the military gets shot at by terrorists and insurgents and they DON'T have qualified immunity and actually do have to follow the rules.
@@LeeeroyJenkins not only is being a police officer only the 22nd most dangerous job, most police deaths in the past year have been Covid-19
It needs to be gone ! If I do something wrong in my job, I get fired and charged if it was criminal
What is your job? Because regardless of what job you have, stealing company property will get you fired and charged. Whether you are a cop, or a congressman.
No it doesn't need to be gone.
@@LeeeroyJenkins not exactly. Cops sometimes steal n investigate themselves n find no wrongdoing.
And I lost count of how often cops steal your ID without punishment.
Politicians seem to often make $ off of insider trading which is kinda stealing.
For starters, UA-cam search civil asset forfeiture. it's basically stealing. peace out
@@jaimepimentel1502 why not? if I can be fired for messing up, why can't a cop?
@@GiordanDiodato because if a cop should be fired there is a proper channel Chiefs and the board should have Probable Cause and Cops should be entitled to a due process and another factor criminals get their feelings hurt when a cop do their jobs these criminals love to lie and file frivolous lawsuits and file frivolous complaints.
Summary: The same individuals who enforce the law, are only held to the law when they admit to KNOWINGLY break it - and they can arrest and imprison, or even kill civilians, who rarely have even BASIC knowledge of the criminal code, but are accountable to the full extent of the law, and cannot use it thereafter to seek justice.
sucks don't it?
So in other words America is a police state...
If you all feel this way. Please share this video to social media!!!! Things must change and now is the time. poor James King from Grand Rapids has been legally fighting this battle since 2014. Now George Floyd's family will have to go through it. Along with many others if this law doesn't get noticed and changed. quick!!! Share this to social media.
No it’s more about liability than anything and it’s up to the court to decide it’s not the police officers fault that it exist it’s the courts fault
@@amandawillen3292 I've been following Mr King's case for a few months now. Did you see pictures of his face? It's obvious he was choked for at least half a minute! Now he's before the Supremes defending his remaining claim from being destroyed by a technicality in one of his denied claims.
Lawyer: 7 years schooling
Dr: 11-14 years
Cop: 6 months to 1 year
Does anyone else see a problem here?
What’s the problem? I don’t see one.
I see it.
Are you willing to compensate police officers on a Doctor or Lawyer level? Increased training means more money. You get what you pay for.
@@bmglover83 I live in SF. Considering that some of our officers get paid 250k-400k+ a year, I expect them to be well trained... (It's public record)
Ryan
Physically?
The police should be better trained period!Additional training/education could be done at home via a computer. The ones that get complaints should be retested/reevaluated to see if they are a good fit. Some people should not be police officers. With cameras everywhere, (especially body worn) the footage should be used more proactively to evaluate situations.
Somebody needs to realize that constitutional law is clearly established law....learning the constitution needs to be a required part of police training
We can’t even get high schools to teach civics and the constitution. Yet you expect law enforcement to be constitutional scholars? Furthermore, cops are advised of constitutional law as it relates to several of the amendments. More specifically, 1st, 2nd, and the 4th.
Also each state has it’s own guidelines for training of police officers. So it is a state standard and not federal. Changes to training have to happen at the state level.
Also constitutional law is not settled law as there are challenges which the Supreme Court still hear and try to provide clarity on.
It is taught
B Small Police officers are armed, working professionals. Thus, they ought to be held to a higher standard than high school students. No one is asking them to be legal scholars or constitutional lawyers, but they should know the rights of the citizens they protect and the limitations of their authority.
@@bsmall1412 yes we expect police to be educated on constitutional rights. How can "law enforcers" do their job properly when they don't know the law? I had to learn every constitutional amendments back in high school when I took political science. It's not hard to learn. You make it sound like cops are too dumb to learn.
Cops are required to learn constitutional law. They're not required to enforce it, or abide by it's principles. They are free to violate law and see few repercussions.
Qualified Immunity is supposed to shield officials from the public contempt in the course of *LEGAL PROCEEDINGS*
But if those proceedings violate the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, then the Qualified Immunity is null&void
And don't bring up the BS excuse: "The officer didn't know the law"
*Ignorance of the law is no longer an excuse. Officers are supposed to know the law during their training* and if they feel like they have overstepped their boundary then pass the buck to a senior officer so that they are ALSO held accountable when slapped with a lawsuit defining the incompetence and stupidity of the entire police force.
This. Like are we not expecting officer, who are supposed to uphold the law, to know the law...???????? Should we also give citizens who do not know the law that they broke, immunity too...????
So it's basically Titles of Nobility ....
History repeats again.
If ignorance of the law is not an excuse for the people, how then is it possible for an official who took an oath to the constitution to be ignorant and therefore immune from punishment?
If qualified immunity only exists for them to perform "discretionary function of their jobs," then why would they ever need to have reverence for the constitution or people if they can use discretion even if it's against the law and get a slap on the wrist?
Agreed. Share this video to social media. Help people see this is the problem!!!
If you're truly in fear for your life then getting sued will be the last thing on your mind.
@Fact Checker Exactly, not having QI will make cops think twice before acting like gods. That will make sure they only use the necessary force when required and if their ass is really on the line they won't be thinking of getting sued but rather saving their lives, I'm sure they won't have any trouble making that call when it truly counts. And if QI has never protected police against unlawful acts why are they trying so hard to keep it in place?
@Fact Checker I know you're not agreeing with me, but your statement goes right to my point that without QI cops will think twice about doing what they do. And if they get sued frivolously or not then they can recover attorney fees and maybe even damages. Besides, don't they have police unions to cover legal?
@@zm6301 you know nothing
What if it's the fear of getting sued if they shoot someone who is threatening _your_ life? You really want a cop to just stand there, wait for it to be over, and simply take the report?
I know that a lot of people would love it if the police simply went away. But who are you going to call when life is so out of control you can't handle it? Seriously? Ghostbusters? Someone steals your car. What are you going to do? Someone kicks in your door while you are at work, beats the crap out of your wife and kids, and kills your dog. You really think you're John Wick? You really think you can take on people who think nothing of shooting randomly into houses for no reason? You going to go hunt them down? Or are you going to out-source that to the government and police?
@@KenJones1961 Same thing applies, if the situation is truly life threatening to them or a hostage then they won't hesitate to act. If they have time to think about being sued then it's not truly life threatening, very simple.
Just now learning about this. And this is pretty much the back drop of how and why police officers get off and if not changed we will forever be spinning our wheels on "police reform."
I cannot believe how catastrophically idiotic the legal framework sculptured by the SC has turned out to be on this issue. And these people are appointed for life and can work well into their 90s if they so chose, setting precedent for a lifetime or more after they clock out. Unreal.
It helps keep the movement of govt slow and more consistent w less chances of being persuaded
Qualified immunity is a violation of equal protection under the law
So is affirmative action and Grant's for black businesses
@@AroundSun how is "equal protection under the law" relevant to affirmative action and grant for black businesses? You are drawing a false equivalence here.
@@AroundSun What is affirmative action?
@@godisgood3805 when business either have to meet a requirement of people of color or when people of color are given an advantage to get into a job or sometimes school, however it does not violate the equal rights protections as people of color are still discriminated against based on their names and locations, they may be less likely to get a higher paying job than someone who is not named Jabari and doesn’t live in the Bronx. AA and grants in general actually fall under the equal protections act. You don’t have to be black to get a grant, you can be left handed, have eyesight issues, have blue eyes, autism etc.
I think the fear of being sued in not an undue burden for officers to bare and could perhaps restrain them from killing and maiming so many people.
Agreed, plus if you're truly in fear for your life then getting sued will be the last thing on your mind.
@@zm6301 Absolutely correct
@@zm6301 That has to be one of the best arguments to repeal Qualified Immunity that I have ever heard.
Keeping that argument in mind there is absolutely no reason for D.A's to enjoy this protection as well. The amount of wrongful convictions in this country is appalling. If a D.A withholds evidence of innocents they should not be protected from their actions. And should be able to be sued and lose everything. Think of how many innocent people have been put to death by their actions. You cannot bring them back, and somehow sorry just does not cut it. Neither does throwing fiat currency ( made out of thin air mind you) at the family. Im sure they would rather have the family member back. If not then their not a family.....
... and keep them at the department not doing their jobs.
No one should be above the law. That is rule of law. I learned about that in 6th grade! Qualified immunity is a violation of that principle!
We are living in another age of tyranny
Personally I feel as tho police judges, and jurors should not have immunity period if you make a bad call you face the consequences period the end
Seriously, we raise our children on this principle. What are we going to start telling our children "There are consequences to your actions, unless you become a judge, or a police officer"
jurors need immunity to function properly, i don't see why jurors should be punished for a "bad decision" This is what allows jury nullification to exist
@@ray495903314 im rephrasing my point, there have in fact been many a case where the jury found a defendant guilty simply because it was easier then looking further into the facts presented to them, only for it to later be proven beyond a doubt that the defendant should have never been found guilty in the first place, if the jurors knew that they could be held to account for rushing their verdict simply to get home sooner, or because the defendant was say tated up and looked the part of the criminal, we would have jurors that would at least be 95 percent sure the defendant in question was guilty, the fact is there have been convictions where the jury found the defendant guilty not because of over whelming evidence but because of over whelming bias
@@ray495903314 and yes a jury could still function properly even witb such a chance over their heads, either that or at the very least i would still stand by that the judge whould be held to account for a bad call especially when an innocent man or woman is jailed and has years of their life taken from them, my point is somwone must be held to account
They’ll stop making any calls. See I solved it. There will be no arrests ever. It is over.
If DWI is found not guilty cop sued and arrested for illegal 4th amend seizure? Witness doesn’t come forward on domestic assault, cop sued arrested for 4th seizure on husbands arrest. Oh no, oh no, oh no no no no no
Police officers... that’s low hanging fruit. Police have the least impact of all in the justice system. A federal judge has the ability to violate 300,000,000 people. Qualified immunity must be eliminated.
If you feel this is true still. Then now is the time to share this video on social media. We need change and ALL victims of this should get justice.
How do those people get in front of that judge 🤔
A judge does not have qualified immunity; a judge has sovereign immunity.
@@zxcvbob Immunity should be abolished, i can't find anyone, except special-interest-online-cronies that do not agree. And if the traitors in the Supreme Court continue their obvious tyranny. The they should be removed, and charged for treason.
State judges and prosecutors are just as potentially bad.
QI needs to be abolished.
Agreed
Without Qualified Immunity a police officer would have to THINK before reacting. We definitely DON’T want our LAW enforcement officers to THINK about their behavior?! 🤔
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." I can't think of anything my divisive than Qualified Immunity.
Officers should definitely have that fear of being sued and held accountable. If you are not certain that you can “use force” then get a supervisor on the scene. You can’t just do it and then be like “oh I didn’t know I couldn’t so I should still have qualified immunity”
what about the times where a situation escalates so fast there isn't time to call your supervisor... there's only time enough to either react or not react... what do you do?
25mfd I was about to comment the same thing!
@@25mfd React!
Teddy Beer now you’re sued.
It’s not that easy. Can’t call a supervisor for everything. Making decisions is our job. And it’s not fear of being wrong it’s fear of being sued anything and everything no matter how right we are. People will sue us because the people who want qualified immunity abolished are the same idiots who don’t think knives are not deadly weapons. The same idiots who say “should have shot them in the leg”. And this is a ridiculous emotion filled opinion based on pure ignorance.
Any and all public servants should never be protected by qualified immunity. This is a big problem today. It is a two tier justice system. One law for the people and one for public servants. Just take it away. Hold them accountable.
Try no law for the "servants". They get away with almost everything and idiots just back it without knowledge.
Qualified immunity is an open door to judicial malfeasance.
and they do it
It should be changed to a reasonable person standard. That standard has been used In law for a long time and works reasonably well. How ever good the intentions for the current standard it works so poorly in practice that judges have repeatedly ruled that an officer has qualified immunity despite admitting that the officers actions were reprehensible.
After protesting for peace after the events of George Floyd, I cannot understand why this law exist. Please abolish Qualified Immunity.
It is PAST time for this to end. I have been sickened by what the police have been allowed to get away with. Examples being, tasing an 87 year old women, beating someone for no reason other than they were just standing there. I do believe that this law must be abolished before the public does it for them. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!! I am a middle class white woman and l had my own experience with the police when l was young. Although l don't condone the violence l understand it and it brought back a very bad memory that brought bile to my throat. If things don't change l will be a protester the next time and l WILL condone the violence. I'm to old to participate but l WILL help fund the organizations that do. This is still America and ALL rights must be upheld. If our leaders are to stupid to change it now we may not have a safe country to live in and it will be all our fault. We have all seen it, tolerated it and some have experienced it. We must make those who are abusing their authority brought to justice and punished accordingly. This must be done SOON.
@@mlcook5872 I've had an experience with a Boston cop who was so insane with anger he literally caused me to fear for my freedom and safety! Every encounter since then if I don't perceive that they are level headed the fear comes back.
If you break a law, that means the law is well defined, by definition.
No one is above the law, Qualified Immunity put the policy above the citizens and the law where they do not belong. If anyone violates the constitution they are violating the highest level of law in the land and should be prosecuted to the full extent regardless of the station in the community. There are no exceptions to the constitution and it is law, if there is some issue with it there are processes for amendments that can occur but until then violation is unlawful.
QI demonstrates two things: 1) cops think they're above the law and should be allowed to operate with impunity and without guidelines. And 2) when the Supreme Court is wrong, they are very wrong and make up a law (or doctrine) to cover their own error.
Bonus trivia: "doctrine" is from the Latin, means "to teach" (or "instruction"; the Supreme Court is there to INTERPRET the constitution. Not to teach anything, nor to make up anything, like a law or a doctrine.
so in short it's something made up by the judicial branch and not an actual law that was passed by the legislative branch.
Anytime the Supreme Court makes a ruling it automatically becomes law. The Supreme Court is honestly the most powerful branch in government.
Hmm...I don't see anything about qualified immunity for police in the Constitution. Instead, I see protections for people against government officials (especially police!) abusing their power to deprive people of life, liberty, or property. This was something the founders had personal experience with at the hands of the Red Coats, and specifically prohibited going forward.
The bill of rights is not hard to understand, and it is something every government official, including police, swear to uphold. Nobody is forced to become a policeman, but if an individual takes the job, and swears and oath to uphold the Constitution, he can't claim he didn't know or didn't understand his responsibilities, or that it was wrong to kill, injure, or damage property.
Police claim they need qualified immunity to do their job. This is nonsense, and dangerous. It can only lead to corruption within the police force itself and injury to the community.
Too late it already has corrupted the cops.
SO WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS THAT A COP CAN KILL SOMEONE WHO WAS NOT DOING ANYTHING TO ANYONE BUT NOW THEY ARE IMMUNE AND THIS CANNOT HAPPEN AGAIN THAT IS JUST INSANE.
Time to ELIMINATE
"QUALIFIED IMMUNITY" for "Felony"
Police Offenders and "OTHERS" in The so-called Legal Community that FAIL TO "UPHOLD THEIR OATH"
But this is only civil court, no?
Nope
Abolish means Abolish.
Looks like we have about 17 police officers lol.
How can the Supreme Court make law. It's their place to interpret it not make it.
Over the last 240 years we have jumbled up the constitution so much it’s damn near impossible to understand anything. Honestly it’s time to start from scratch. Interpreting the law is very similar to making laws. When something is ambiguous they make it black in white by doing so which in a way is making laws.
First task, get rid of government unions. Then destroy qualified immunity.
I served in the Army for 35 years as Second Lieutenant to retiring as a Colonel. I never had qualified immunity for my actions, or for the actions of my soldiers. We treated our POWs with respect under the Geneva Convention. Any soldier, under my command, who violated the rights of our POWs would no longer have the privilege of serving in the armed forces of the United States. My question is, why do our public servants have qualified immunity over me when I don’t have qualified immunity over enemy combatants. I could be court marshalled under UCMJ if I violated the rights of a POW. Every public servant should be held personally responsible for their actions, commensurate with any citizen of our great nation.
No police officer in the United States should ever have qualified immunity if they can't be held accountable for their actions that's against the Constitution so we need to take the qualified immunity away from every police officer in the United States so they can be held accountable just like the rest of the public
Applying such immunity to an entire chain of command means that the grey area that always exists between current written, stated and implied policies, regulations and procedures and the Officer's interpretations of such, is an escape route often used to apply the rules for Q.I.. For every such grey area there is a virtual playground for the ignorant, or plainly abusive and negligent, and there, you will always find victims of the very institution that is there to protect them. And they have little if any true remedy. Q.I. certainly will prevent the repercussions of these actions from climbing the very chain of command that rarely if ever takes an effective proactive approach in Training and discipline of the offending official. This goes all the way to the most senior executive in that Administration. Cops ARE just "ordinary men", poorly trained managed. Often they're only doing as their predecessors taught and may now direct them to do. Its a system with perpetuation of the criminally bad with the good.
If a cop commits a crime they should be held accountable not a paid vacation at the taxpayers expense. No one should be above the law.
How is this even a debate in our country? Our public servants need to be held accountable!! Lets educate them on law for fucks sake!!
And this is across the world btw not just US. Everyone should be held accountable!!!
Without qualified immunity, police officers can carry their own liability insurance, just like doctors. Why have it in the first place?
In a bad situation in the heat of battle, get killed or sued, these are your thoughts everyday, what pressure on top of all the stuff, cops have to deal with. Wow, what a terrible choice.
The Vermont State Constitution states in Article 6. [Officers servants of the people]
That all power being originally inherent in and co[n]sequently derived from the people, therefore, all officers of government, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and servants; and at all times, in a legal way, accountable to them.
You all know the legal system.
Every criminal in the country would file suit at a perceived fault. Police would be personally overwhelmed by those making a power move.
Some would be immune from prosecution because of their skin. ( more than they already are ) Everybody could claim something and sue.
You want police to risk themselves personally from every ambulance chaser lawyer in the country ?
If Qualified immunity is in use why are they’re cops in jail, lose they’re spouse and job, now you want to sue them, isn’t that enough to tell them not to use excessive force, resulting in hurting or killing many law breaking individuals???
for those who support qualified immunity, why the same principle doesn't apply to citizens? if I kill someone defending myself I have to prove that I was defending myself, why are cops exonerated?
Their job should not involve violating people's basic rights. Maybe they should rather be taught how to work with people's rights.
Qualified immunity in and of itself is unconstitutional
Facts
not knowing the law is not a legal defense for anyone, so why should it be legal for police officers whose actions can cause the death of innocent people or at the very least ruin their lives?.
Qualified Immunity is simply a shield from liability created to help dodge financial and criminal liability from government officials, it does absolutely nothing to benefit the public in general, this is a clear example of the government literally telling citizens the law does not apply to them equally.
Obviously this immunity has to go. Officials have to be accountable for shootings. They should even be accountable for unreasonable discharges of their firearms. Firm rules of engagement should be put into place. They should not pull a gun/or weapon on an unarmed person who is not being violent, if someone is unarmed and aggressive use non lethal weapons( taser, pepper spray) , use a gun as a last resort not pull a gun as one of the first things you do.
Where in ANY of our 51 Constitutions did We the People expressly grant ANY of our trustees and servants ANY type of immunity?
Georgia State Constitution Article I Section 2 Paragraph 1 - Origin and Foundation of Government:
“All government, of right, originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Public officers are the trustees and servants of the people and are at all times amenable to them.”
If the trustees and servants are claiming immunity then We the People must have immunity as well because it’s impossible for We the People to grant something We Ourselves don’t own.
🙏🇺🇸✌🏻!
Qualified immunity wouldn't exist if the cops would be force to actually learn the law they are enforcing, instead of just going to a police academy for a short period of time and then getting handed a badge and a gun.
Thank you for an informative that presents the information without bias. I was interested in what q.i. was and you gave a clear answer while giving sides a fair shot.
considering the history of police conduct and misconduct in America, NO government official should be immune from liability, EVER.
It really surprised me that the Supreme Court of the United States can make laws, I thought their job was to interpret the law.. it would seem to me that the Supreme Court has join forces against the American society and now make laws to protect their cohorts which are government and agencies and departments of law enforcement across America. We the People have lost our Constitution and Bill of Rights and have no protection. It's easy to see who have become our enemies, now we need to figure out how to fight them. It looks like to me we the people are there Serfs and they have made themselves gods over us.
Unless it changes. They will need to be cornered first.
"qualified immunity" makes kings & slaves !! ... if you have it, your a king ... if you DON'T have it, your a slave ... end of story !!
They need to get rid of this law Asap This is why cops keep getting away with murder cause of this stupid as loophole!
This is patently untrue. Officers can (and do) get charged criminally if they break the law. QI only applies to civil suits, and officers are still liable under civil law if they clearly break an established law.
3:08 “Officers must be able to use deadly force without the fear of liability”.
That’s dangerous logic. I’m sure every profession would love to remove the fear of liability too but that’s not the world we live in. You f up, you pay the price. Nobody should have immunity.
Liability ooooor accountability?
the bigger issue here is judicial activism... when the courts make laws from the bench, the back and forth of debating the PROS and CONS of it are eliminated... when this is eliminated there is a LOT more confusion and cloudiness about anything that may arise as a direct consequence of the new "court legislated" law... so now if there are any questions about anything related to the "new" law, who do we go to for answers... the courts????… congress???... as a general rule, the gov body with 9 unelected officials should NOT be the place where laws are made
In America nobody should be above the law. Qualified immunity literally equates to tyranny.
You all should know that We the People have qualified immunity. We all can agree on those heinous crimes, murder, rape, any injury to a child, arson, theft.....Now everything else all traffic crimes, drug possession, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer, so long as we do not cause any physical injury to another man/woman. Now instead of trying to avoid our right to a possible jury selection, we should all participate in this process. Now no more plea bargains, no more pleas of guilty, no contest, (no contendere) we should all plea innocent (because our court system is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.) And do not leave it up to the judge to decide if your innocent/ guilty, and to decide on your punishment. If we all can agree and unite and stand as one to stop all this federal/local government over reach, abuse, Federal/state constitutional rights violations, tyranny, etc.....Now we all should ask for a speedy trial, and all those on the jury panel we all have to step it up and protect the People from all this govt abuse of power. We all need to stand as one, put your skin color, political party, religion, all aside and just view us as man/woman and protect each other and start finding every case not guilty, and make it very clear to our Federal/state/local corporation (not government...) that We the People are the ones that possess the power, and we all need to and we all have the power to make a stand and make it very clear to them and remind them of their classification (servants) to the People. Now you can imagine if we all stood as one and did this no People would have any more worries in court. So lets all start our People Immunity right now.
Essentially, if no police officer has been successfully sued for doing the exact same thing that you just did you can't be sued for doing it. And since there are always some kind of details that differ from case to case any previous case that went against a police officer does not apply in your case. You have civil immunity to do absolutely anything.
They should be allowed to do their duty professionally, not negligently! Incompetence is the wrong standard, negligence is the correct standard!
Supreme Court needs to spend a day watching all the problems it has created
Is a way for our public servants to get away with their crimes and rights violations and is as unconstitutional as it gets.
Without qualified immunity it would be nearly impossible to police for profit. The government has a vested interest in the income generated by policing for profi,t from something so clearly against the spirit of the establishment of this country.
Law enforcement are the only real sovereign citizens in America shielded by their union, their command, prosecutors, judges, politicians, and the Supreme Court. They have taken the idea of "Qualified Immunity" and exploited it in order to act above the law in violating private citizens with impunity. Any individual who is performing his job without responsibility can not be trusted. In fact police officer do no have to actually know laws they are charged to enforce, the Supreme Court gave them an out on that to. No such profession has the Supreme Court as an excuse nor can they feign not knowing laws and standards under which they practice, except law enforcement. This is absolutely not what our founding fathers wanted.
If a code of conduct is unimportant then the US might as well be Venezuela. Those in positions of power should always have a counter balance to ensure they DO THE RIGHT THING WHEN NO ONE IS WATCHING”.
Qualified Immunity gives police a great deal of power in lower level violations as well. For instance, if someone is disrespectful to a police officer, swears or otherwise shows contempt for police officers, the officer can retaliate with an arrest, several hours in jail, causing legal fees, stress and aggrivation for citizens with no ramifications for themselves.
So let me get this straight a police officer could knowingly shit on someone's bed and punch a suspect in the head, but if it is not a constitutional violation they're okay? But a civilian could accidentally steal something they didn't know was free and be charged? Make it make sense
Soldiers have such a higher standard of rules of engagement with non-American citizens in other countries yet police officers are given “discretion” and qualified immunity. Not good at all. People are just not good at making discretionary judgments to begin with
No other job has qualified immunity, high stress or not, not lawyers not doctors, its a free pass for the police to trample our constitutional rights with impunity, the deletions of service records and violations every 6 months should also be illegal. The culture of police being above the law needs to stop, they should be held to a higher standard instead of doing whatever they want. It should take YEARS of study and training to be a police officer, not weeks. Steps could easily be taken to address these problems but as long as police unions continue to lobby (bribe) our elected officials nothing will change.
I think each individual law enforcement personnel should be required to earn the right to have qualified immunity by proving that he upholds the law and people's constitutional rights.
It should be a privilege that is earned once you establish a competent honest character
Those who manipulate their power to abuse the law will face their own justice soon enough. The true authority is watching.
Professor Joanna Schwartz is correct
If the law is not clearly defined, then how can it be a maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse?
qualified immunity allows police officers to conduct their Duty without being compromised because of a fear that they are going to be prosecuted simply for performing their job.
any extra consideration that we can give to a police officer`s judgment is necessary so that officers can perform diligently and without harassment from frivolous expression
That is: media attention and outrageous lawsuits
"simply for performing their job" aka enforcing the law and protecting civilians' constitutional rights.
Unfortunately, no one is immune to harassment, that's what the courts are for. It sounds like a district court could stand to win millions if they abolish qualified immunity, and have their day in court against civilians with 'frivolous' complaints - but of course they won't - because they know hat we all know, which is that state officials live above the law.
"Qualified immunity" is simply a license to kill, to steal, to destroy. It has nothing to do with a police officer doing his job, which is to protect and serve the community. This involves a degree of risk, just as being a life guard involves a degree of risk. Don't like risk? Don't be a cop, or a lifeguard. That job's not for you.
As a practical matter, "qualified immunity" is never needed as a defense when the officer does his job right. It is only used as a defense when the officer screws up or engages in deliberate wrongdoing. And police do screw up, just like anyone else, when they are tired, frustrated, high, drunk, or just annoyed by things on and off the job.
There are innumerable videos of these police screw ups where the family pet is shot, or an innocent person is harassed, arrested, raped or even killed by over-zealous, vicious, or just plain careless cops. it's gotten to the point that cops cannot be trusted around children - one cop was caught molesting a mothers minor daughter in the restroom - of the police station!
Take away qualified immunity and everyone, including cops, will be better off.
Where in the Constitution does it say that Qualified Immunity is a law. It has not been legally instituted as a law, It has not been voted on by the general population. The supreme court established an illegal mandate, policy or what ever.
I absolutely disagree with the idea that a public servant shouldn't have to defend their actions in a court. to get at the incompetence you must first examine it, in a court.
protecting the rights of the citizen is paramount. the public servant is performing a public service. harming citizens while performing that public service needs accountability, this is how you increase integrity of a fluid system.
Officers get paid $60,000 a year on average. They get training at a value of $15,000 They read the Constitution They know the amendments 1,2,4,5 and so on. It doesn't make sense for the hired body to spend over $100,000 a year on an officer and pay out millions in absolute violations of the constitution. If a new law is signed by the state legislators or both houses and the president signs it and goes into effect and I unknowingly violate it I would be found guilty, I would be fined and or punished among other penalties that could cost me more than I make in 3 years yet I don't get the same protections. "All Men have Created Equal Equal protections under the law.. That is important and clear and present in writing. Joe and I violate the law and cost the victim a loss. I don't have qualified immunity and joe does. Both found guilty. I pay $50,000 in fines and damages and Joe walks with nothing "Equal Protection Under The LAW??" Yet LA County in one year paid over $12,000,000 because of what 5 officers did. They paid NOTHING We the people did. They were able to resign and get hired in another county ... until they get caught again.
Qualified immunity has to go and it is up to Congress and Senate to pass legislation and the president to sign it. This will negate and make useless what the Supreme court created not as a legislative branch but judicial branch where their opinion should have been mute
Can't forget Prosecutorial Immunity.....Ugh.
I guarantee you that the politicians won’t get rid of their qualified immunity
Qualified immunity doctrine is completely legal according to the 14th amendment that guarantees me equal protection.
Police need the ability to trample on the Constitution without worrying about being held responsible for their actions.
That is not a dangerous situation, that is a check on fascism.
CHILDREN... LESSONS LEARNED:
1. STAY IN SCHOOL,
2. DON'T USE DRUGS,
3. FOLLOW THE LAW,
4. FOLLOW POLICE DIRECTION,
5. DON'T ENVY (COVET) WHAT OTHERS HAVE.
with petty differanes like was vic. standing or sitting when police dog attacked man handcuffed
Qualified immunited grants extra rights to government officials, poilce especially, that makes them a different class of citizen, effectively putting them above the law..... End qualified immunty and bring honesty and integrity to the law enforcement profession.
The concept of "qualified immunity" is good and needed BUT the procedure/analysis of determining "clearly established" is currently ( see at 2:14 ) THE BIG PROBLEM
The Court needs to go back to the pre-2009 change to the analysis.
Qualified immunity is to easily used by ego driven, corrupt, or just self protecting officers to avoid punishment for knowingly and blatant violation one's rights.
Police definitely should be held accountable and have consequences to their actions. If they have no fear for getting in trouble then they will do whatever they want. All cops should also be filmed with body cams they cannot turn off while on duty.
It is time to end qualified immunity, it never should have been started to begin with. With the help of qualified immunity we have gone from cops be held to a high standard to cops not being held to any standard at all.
Agreed. Now is the time to share this on social media and make sure people are aware of where change needs to start!!!!
Incorrect, you may not like qualified immunity but it doesn’t mean the converse of not having it is true.
3:25 the fear of being sued by the accused vs the fear of being injured by police before proven guilty? Clearly those in power would like to be treated as us civilians.
The very problem with that statement is how the law enforcement officers see themselves and what they do also how they are trained. If they are trained incorrectly in the first place how will that work if they believe they can do whatever they want and have no blowback. There is the problem with today's law enforcement officers they believe that there is no consequence for their actions because of the immunity and lately that has been the case in many cases. Yes officers need to be able to do their jobs however they also need to be held accountable for crossing the line. This is supposed to be a nation of checks and balances and rights of the people, however that doesn't seem to exist anymore.
In a lawsuit how far do you get into the lawsuit when qualified immunity become an issue im at a settlement conference phase now is it an issue i have to worry about
Let the individual policeman/woman carry their own malpractice insurance the same as physicians do. Taxpayers also shouldn't be on the hook for an officer's error in their judgments nor for the ever-rising cost of municipal insurance to cover a police departments, so-called, "bad apple."