The Supreme Court refused on Monday to take up qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that often serves as a shield for police officers and other public officials accused of misconduct.
This decision is troubling for several reasons, but one concern raised by Justice Clarence Thomas is worth noting: By refusing to hear a case on qualified immunity, Thomas writes in his dissent, the court is asserting its own interpretation of the law rather than adhering to its original meaning.
Stay informed.Stay ahead.
Join Washington Examiner for unlimited access to the news, analysis, and commentary that matter most.
See Options
Already a member? Log in
Already a print subscriber? Click here to login/register your account
