The Supreme Court on Monday sided with law enforcement in two cases in which plaintiffs claimed police used excessive force, reversing separate lower court rulings allowing the officers to be sued for violations of civil rights.
The court said law enforcement officers are entitled to protections from liability unless it is “clear to a reasonable officer” that the accused committed unlawful actions, according to two unsigned opinions. Both cases had rulings stating the officers were entitled to qualified immunity, a legal doctrine preventing government officials from being sued for violations of citizens’ rights.
Democratic and libertarian critics of qualified immunity say its invocation results in officers extending their authority past its limits to gain an unwarranted legal shield. Republicans argue the doctrine is necessary for police retention as departments have seen massive resignations since last year’s summer of unrest following the murder of George Floyd while in police custody in Minneapolis.
POLICE REFORM DEAL HINGES ON ‘QUALIFIED IMMUNITY’
In one of the lawsuits, justices overturned a decision by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals not to give qualified immunity to Oklahoma officers Josh Girdner and Brandon Vick in the fatal shooting of Dominic Rollice.
The officers were part of a larger police group responding to a 2016 emergency call from the ex-wife of the late 49-year-old Rollice, who was intoxicated in her garage and refused to leave. When officers arrived, Rollice brandished a hammer as a weapon before he was shot by law enforcement personnel, the court’s opinion described.
Austin P. Bond, as the administrator of Rollice’s estate, sued, and a 10th Circuit panel said the officers could not avoid being sued by invoking qualified immunity. Bond said that body camera footage revealed one officer announced he would “go less than lethal” and switched from a handgun to a stun gun, thus arguing the other officers should have holstered their handguns.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the plaintiff, saying, “The officers plainly did not violate any clearly established law.”
“As we have explained, qualified immunity protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law,’” the justices wrote.
The other case involved a police dispatch in Union City near San Francisco five years ago. An emergency call was made by a 12-year-old girl reporting that her mother’s boyfriend, Ramon Cortesluna, had a chain saw and allegedly planned to attack. When police spotted a knife in the man’s pocket, they shot him with beanbag rounds as he lowered his hand in apparent confusion from police orders.
Cortesluna was subsequently placed on the ground, and an officer temporarily placed a “knee on the left side” of his neck. Attorneys for the police told the Supreme Court that the kneeling move used on Cortesluna is “standard field procedure.”
Since the death of Floyd, several lawsuits have emerged challenging police tactics in the field. The Supreme Court revived claims of excessive force against St. Louis police officers in June in a case in which a homeless man died after being restrained in handcuffs and leg shackles.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Lawmakers have also attempted to address police tactics in reform laws. However, senators failed to enact the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act last month after a bipartisan negotiations team said it failed to reach a deal.
