Share this page!

Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
Twitter logo
9 Sep, 4 tweets, 2 min read
After a car chase, cop opened fire when suspect put stopped car in reverse. Officer “fired 11 shots through the back windshield and side windows as the car passed near him. Then he changed magazines and fired another 10 shots.” Driver was killed and passengers injured. QI granted
Dissent: use of deadly force not justified. Car was not aimed at cop, was moving slowly and cop did not provide any warning before shooting.

“And not only do I believe the majority opinion is wrong, but I worry that it sets a dangerous standard for police use of force”
We featured a factually similar case in our qualified immunity series in which QI also granted:
reuters.com/investigates/s…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Lawrence Hurley

Lawrence Hurley Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @lawrencehurley

Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
8 Sep
Supreme Court to hear oral arguments in person this fall — press release
Court will not allow public in the courtroom but justices, court personnel, lawyers and credentialed journalists will be allowed in. The gamechanger though is that live audio will continue
Supreme Court makes clear this development is, at the moment, for Oct, Nov and Dec arguments only
Read 6 tweets
Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
3 Sep
At a presidential debate in 2016, candidate Trump said that if he got the chance to appoint 2-3 Supreme Court justices, Roe v Wade would “automatically” be overturned. His bold prediction could soon turn out to be correct: reut.rs/3DMAEO7
Trump filled Scalia’s seat first but that didn’t change the balance of the court. Justice Kennedy’s retirement in 2018 was really the gamechanger as Kennedy had previously voted in favor of abortion rights. Now, with Kavanaugh in board, Roe was definitely under threat
Anti-abortion activists had a shock in 2020 when Roberts sided with liberals to strike down a Louisiana restriction (although that may have been a one-off). But even Roberts’ vote doesn’t matter any more because Ginsburg was replaced by Barrett creating the 6-3 majority
Read 7 tweets
Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
2 Sep
There seems to be this received wisdom that somehow the "news media" has downplayed the prospect of abortion rights being curbed by the Supreme Court. Where is the evidence of that?
Pretty much everyone involved in abortion litigation has been openly discussing how Roe v. Wade is on the line ever since Justice Kennedy retired and pretty sure every SCOTUS reporter has reported on it as such
Here's a story *from the day Kennedy announced his retirement*

reuters.com/article/us-usa…
Read 4 tweets
Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
2 Sep
FRONTIER JUSTICE: Texas has deputized its citizens to snitch on abortion providers in exchange for $10,000 bounties in a throwback to early U.S. history when laws like this were more common. Here's how it all works:
reuters.com/world/us/texas…
"It is a little bit like the Wild West," said Harold Krent, a professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law, noting the law could be ripe for abuse because there is no discretion exercised over how and when to enforce it, as would be the case if state officials were in charge
"I feel like there's a bounty on my head and I don’t want play this game," said one doctor who previously performed abortions in Texas
Read 7 tweets
Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
2 Sep
SUPREME COURT REFUSES TO BLOCK TEXAS ABORTION RESTRICTION - court order
Vote is 5-4, with Chief Justice joining the liberal justices in saying an injunction should have been granted
Majority says (briefly) the order does not reflect any judgment on the merits and does not prevent challenges from moving forward
Read 11 tweets
Lawrence Hurley Profile picture
2 Sep
There has been a lot of criticism of the Supreme Court's shadow docket recently but one thing the court could easily do in situations like *now* is to be more open in communicating publicly what it is doing and what the timeline is going to be, even if the decision is not ready
Now that the Texas law has gone into effect there's not really any difference between the court doing something late tonight and doing it at 9:30 tomorrow morning, for example, but here we are
I know at least one prof said that concerns about when the court acts on shadow docket cases were trivial and driven by the self-interest of people like me who have to stay up late, but as this case shows, sometimes there is genuine & broad public interest in what the court does
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @lawrencehurley has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @lawrencehurley!

Read all threads by @lawrencehurley

:(