Anyone see the Republicans lately? Amash calls for no immunity for police

1

There are dangerous attacks on police, both physically and verbally. Threats of defunding stripping them of their immunity is going mainstream.

Justin Amash, an Independent and Trump hater, is calling to end qualified immunity for police. Amash signed up for the bill with extremely far-left, squad member, Ayanna Pressley (D-MA).

The legislation, called the Ending Qualified Immunity Act, would explicitly state those police officers who engage in civil rights violations are not exempt from liability. The idea of qualified immunity is not a law that can be repealed but rather a legal doctrine developed by decades of court cases that holds police officers and other public officials immune from civil lawsuits unless they violate a “clearly established” law or constitutional right, the Boston Globe reports.

According to the Globe, “Qualified immunity shields police from accountability, impedes true justice, and undermines the constitutional rights of every person in this country,” Pressley said in a statement. “There can be no justice without healing and accountability, and there can be no true accountability with qualified immunity. It’s past time to end qualified immunity, and that’s exactly what this bill does.”

Cornell law edu defines ‘qualified immunity’:

Qualified immunity is a type of legal immunity. “Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment, distraction, and liability when they perform their duties reasonably.” Pearson v. Callahan .

Specifically, qualified immunity protects a government official from lawsuits alleging that the official violated a plaintiff‘s rights, only allowing suits where officials violated a “clearly established” statutory or constitutional right. When determining whether or not a right was “clearly established,” courts consider whether a hypothetical reasonable official would have known that the defendant’s conduct violated the plaintiff’s rights. Courts conducting this analysis apply the law that was in force at the time of the alleged violation, not the law in effect when the court considers the case.

Qualified immunity is not immunity from having to pay money damages, but rather immunity from having to go through the costs of a trial at all. Accordingly, courts must resolve qualified immunity issues as early in a case as possible, preferably before discovery.

Qualified immunity only applies to suits against government officials as individuals, not suits against the government for damages caused by the officials’ actions. Although qualified immunity frequently appears in cases involving police officers, it also applies to most other executive branch officials. While judges, prosecutors, legislators, and some other government officials do not receive qualified immunity, most are protected by other immunity doctrines.

OPINION

People can sue police. Removing qualified immunity makes them into targets and will make them very vulnerable.

Without qualified immunity, every time the police do their job, someone can sue. Everything is political and political vendettas will ensue. Who would be an officer under these conditions?

Bernie Kerik was on ‘Justice with Jeanine ‘last night and said that he heard nearly 600 officers so far are looking to leave the NYPD.

Something like this sounds good but when you look at it, you realize it destroys law enforcement to stop the minority of bad cops who turn up.

Many Libertarians want to see law enforcement lose power, but it is a dangerous and radical idea.

WATCH:

PowerInbox

1 COMMENT

Leave a Reply