cop cannot be sued for hitting 10 year old because it wasn't intentional
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...-court-rules/?
A federal appeals court dismissed a civil-rights lawsuit filed against a Georgia deputy who tried to shoot a family’s dog, but instead hit a 10-year-old boy lying down on the ground. Instead of having to face a $2 million lawsuit for excessive force, Coffee County Deputy Sheriff Michael Vickers was entitled to “qualified immunity” for his actions and cannot be sued in federal court, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week.
Starting in the 1980s, the U.S. Supreme Court began to radically re-shape its doctrine of qualified immunity, creating an escape hatch that lets government officials dodge federal civil-rights lawsuits. As the Supreme Court once put it, qualified immunity “provides ample protection to all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
Today, government officials can only be held accountable in court if plaintiffs show that their constitutional rights were violated and that those rights were “clearly established.” And according to the Supreme Court, “the clearly established law must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case.”
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Bookmarks