Unfortunate that SCOTUS denied cert in Jessop v City of Fresno concerning theft of assets by POs & the application of Qualified Immunity. We need to see the High Court do away with QI as its just another hurdle victims of PO misconduct need to overcome. @neal_katyal @NPAP_NLG
A quick explanation of what Qualified Immunity or QI means in a civil rights context. If a police officer engages in an activity against a suspect that they reasonable believe is a lawful activity, even if it violates the suspects Constitutional rights, the PO may not be 1/
liable for that activity. Under the law, they’ll be immune from any damage they may have caused, including death. The activity is viewed under an objectively reasonable standard. In other words, if a judge or jury believe the officer acted reasonably, in general, the PO will 2/
be immune from civil prosecution. You can see how this can be abused. In gen, if you’re hurt via negligence by someone, they’re liable for your damages. QI adds another layer of protection for LE. Even if they’re negligent or act w intent, they could be immune from liability. X
