News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by JumpCrisscross on Thursday April 08, 2021 @02:38AM (#26735781)
> You see no issue with that, seriously?

Qualified immunity isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. It is released, for example, when a government official breaks clearly established law. (Counterfactual: the courts have been very narrow in interpreting what "clearly established" means.)

Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by stormbrew on Thursday April 08, 2021 @03:06AM (#26735922)
To expand on just how absurdly narrow courts interpret "clearly established", there's this example from the wikipedia page on qualified immunity[1] for eg.

> Critics have cited examples such as a November 2019 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which found that an earlier court case ruling it unconstitutional for police to sic dogs on suspects who have surrendered by lying on the ground did not apply under the "clearly established" rule to a case in which Tennessee police allowed their police dog to bite a surrendered suspect because the suspect had surrendered not by lying down but by sitting on the ground and raising his hands.

The net effect of this appears to basically be that it's impossible to prove literally anything pierces qualified immunity unless it was ruled on prior to the establishment of qualified immunity as a defense. How exactly can you create precedent when you require nearly identical precedent to set it? It's a blatant catch-22. Like, literally something that could have been in the book Catch 22.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity

Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by gwd on Thursday April 08, 2021 @04:18AM (#26736328)
Even better is the police who just stole stuff, because there was no "clearly established" law against stealing stuff:

https://newrepublic.com/article/157342/supreme-court-police-...

Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by dragonwriter on Thursday April 08, 2021 @03:42AM (#26736114)
> Qualified immunity isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card.

No, its a get-out-of-civil-liability-free card.

> It is released, for example, when a government official breaks clearly established law.

No, its not. As well as meeting the extremely narrow standard established for violating “clearly established law” and act must also fail to meet the extremely broad standard established for being an “objectively reasonable action”; otherwise, even if it violates a clearly established legal right, it remains protected by QI.

While some protection loosely similar to QI may make sense, the actual rules around QI, both at the high level and in the details of how the high-level rules are applied, are particularly bad, especially, in practice, in the case of law enforcement officials, who practice within the law enforcement community puts at greatly reduced likelihood of being held criminally accountable for violations of rights than non-law-enforcement government agents.

Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by austincheney on Thursday April 08, 2021 @06:19AM (#26737061)
> No, its not.

There is no qualified immunity protection upon the conviction of a criminal act regardless of how narrow or broad underlying factors are.

Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by jellicle on Thursday April 08, 2021 @11:16AM (#26739853)
You seem to have confused a true statement (qualified immunity is about torts, not crimes) with a false one (if there was a crime, then there can't be any qualified immunity claim in a corresponding civil case).
Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by zrail on Thursday April 08, 2021 @06:34AM (#26737146)
You have to be convicted first. Police don't even get indicted.
Re:New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity by ceejayoz on Thursday April 08, 2021 @07:12AM (#26737348)
That’s what you have friendly prosecutors for.