Do We Need Qualified Immunity?

Рет қаралды 8,477

Күн бұрын

Qualified immunity is perhaps the nation’s most controversial legal doctrine. Proponents say qualified immunity is necessary to give government officials-especially police-breathing room to act in split-second situations without fear of lawsuits. By requiring that a right be “clearly established” before an official can be sued for violating it, the doctrine is supposed to ensure officials have notice of what conduct to avoid before they put a foot wrong. Meanwhile, critics argue that qualified immunity makes it too difficult for victims of government abuse to pursue justice and too often protects officials who have egregiously violated the Constitution, all while failing to put officials on notice. And now new Institute for Justice research finds that the doctrine shields a wide array of government officials and conduct, including premeditated First Amendment retaliation. Join us as we considered these two perspectives on qualified immunity and sought an answer to the question, “Do we need qualified immunity?”
Featuring:
Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Michael Perloff, Interim Legal Director, ACLU
Moderator: Robert McNamara, Deputy Litigation Director, Institute for Justice
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

Пікірлер: 21

@jloiben12 Ай бұрын

The answer to this question is, objectively, no. This is not necessary. And what’s worse, it is just bad law

@Jianju69 Ай бұрын

Consider that it is the police that are charged with arresting dangerous felons. No qualified immunity whatsoever means no room for good faith errors. Who wants to be a cop when one must essentially do it upon a high-rise tightrope?

@spencerlane2871 Ай бұрын

If an officer did nothing wrong, he doesn't need qualified immunity. A JURY will say "he did nothing wrong" and acquit.

@Jianju69 Ай бұрын

What do you do for a living?

@user-kq7mb2ce8r Ай бұрын

This goes against what we are and what our ancestors fought for. The law applies to everyone

@manny2ndamendment246 Ай бұрын

police are the standing army the founders warned about.

@spyder5571 Ай бұрын

The answer is 100% yes.

@kussemeinkont Ай бұрын

So qualified immunity does not protect a government official from prosecution for a crime, which is what excessive force is, an assault. The problem is that cops are not beholden to their own laws.

@AChoosen1 Ай бұрын

I think the answer to that is pretty simple. We must protect also the Americans that have not woken up to the insanity, but soon they will enable realize how they’ve been lied to by the federal government.

@Rainy_Day12234 Ай бұрын

I don’t trust judges or the public. So yes.

@broken2bones Ай бұрын

Abolish qualified immunity

@James-Rounds Ай бұрын

It comes down to who you are lawfully.

@James-Rounds Ай бұрын

😂 there is No Qualified immunity.

@someguyusa Ай бұрын

If I as a military member am held liable to state, federal, and UCMJ laws, then police should be held liable to at least state or federal. Hell, they should probably have it as strict as military in that regard. If a war zone doesn’t grant special exemptions, then policing in a domestic scenario surely doesn’t either.

@kussemeinkont Ай бұрын

and US presidents should be tried as war criminals, aint gonna happen, laws are made to protect the powerful

@Jianju69 Ай бұрын

Are you saying a soldier is held liable if he accidentally kills a civilian during a war?

@tanishascottham Ай бұрын

I don't think that we need qualified immunity for police officers/correctional officers. I think we should consider replacing it with some kind of commercial insurance vehicle, like how a roofer needs to get bonded to fix your roof. Seems like certain professions should offer umbrella policies to its employees, maybe at a discounted rate.