We want to:
- Make it easier for victims of police violence to sue without the burden of qualified immunity;
- limit or eliminate Law Enforcement Officer Bills of Rights (LEOBOR).
We want to:
Creates right of action for violations of rights by law enforcement under Tennessee Constitution, eliminates QI.
Creates private right of action under state constitution and eliminates QI for all government employees.
Establishes certain restrictions on qualified immunity defense for public employees.
Creates civil rights cause of action and eliminates qualified immunity as well as common law immunities.
Petitioners are seeking an adjustment to the current standards federal courts use to assess civil claims for civil rights violations. Under Section 1983, courts analyze excessive force claims arising out of arrests, stops, and other seizures of individuals at liberty under the Fourth Amendment.
Petitioners are seeking to amend Section 1983 to eliminate qualified immunity as a defense and make the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard less burdensome. Currently, in cases where an officer claims they used force because an individual was holding a weapon, the plaintiff has to prove that a reasonable officer could not have concluded that the weapon posed a risk. Unfortunately, courts often allow officers to justify deadly shootings on the basis of hypothetical possibilities even when there is no supporting evidence.
In a case where the Second Circuit had already held that a jury could find that prison officers violated the plaintiff’s rights, and the majority on a second appeal gives the defendants qualified immunity, see the dissent by Judge Guido Calabresi, concluding that “this ill-founded, court-made doctrine” should be abolished.
“Permit officer” who handles applications for ambulance permits did not have authority under state law to conduct a stop, thus acted outside his discretionary authority in stopping and detaining an ambulance that did not have a permit, and therefore was not entitled to qualified immunity for the stop.
Collecting cases standing for proposition that excessive force may so obviously violate the Constitution that no pre-existing case law is needed to show that it is clearly established law.