Mississippi sheriff aims to avoid liability from federal lawsuit over torture of Black men

Absolute perfect case of why qualified immunity must die.

My own proposal below, Alabama being used generically as the name of the State.

§ 13. [Sovereign immunity and qualified immunity abrogated]

The State of Alabama, all local governments and all subordinate government units forever waive their right of sovereign immunity as to all cases in law and equity prosecuted against them by the United States, any State, any foreign State or any person, foreign or domestic. The State of Alabama waives its immunity to suit granted under the eleventh article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States and consents to be sued by citizens of other States and of foreign States in the courts of the United States. The doctrine of qualified immunity is forever abrogated in the State of Alabama. All elected officials, officers, judicial officers and employees of the State of Alabama, any local government or any subordinate government unit shall be jointly and severally liable for all acts and omissions in the course of executing their office or duties and shall not receive any immunities not available to all residents of the State of Alabama. The courts of Alabama may dismiss, sua sponte, any such case if it is plainly frivolous or meritless. The courts of Alabama may assess, sua sponte, sanctions for repeated filings of a frivolous or meritless character.

This case is particularly heinous, because it took place with the tacit, if not explicit, approval of the elected Sheriff. He clearly knew these men were stormtroopers and did nothing.

And now he has the ■■■■■■■ gall to try to hide behind qualified immunity.

If you want any measure of accountability for police or sheriffs, qualified immunity must be abolished.

1 Like

I don’t want it abolished but I agree it needs to be modified.

How would you modify it? I see it as in military. You can’t hide behind I was ordered too for example.

1 Like

Ever notice how when two sides agree with each other on something that should be happening but isn’t, they quickly move on to something else where they disagree? :thinking:

1 Like

The article referenced shows he had put them through training after a prior incident, so he didn’t do nothing. Was that enough to avoid liability? Let a jury decide. Yes, immunity should be limited, though perhaps some degree of immunity for simple negligence needs to remain, or who would take those jobs?

I believe there are ways to protect police from frivolous or meritless suits in lieu of qualified immunity.

For example, my own proposal provides for a mechanism for courts to sua sponte (on their own initiative) to dismiss meritless lawsuits and to sanction those who repeatedly file such lawsuits.

Also, I believe a mechanism can be devised to deal with borderline suits to make a judicial determination of whether to go ahead to trial or dismiss, without the officer having to be tied up in court proceedings pending that decision.

Yes, there are clearly bull ■■■■ lawsuits filed by disgruntled arrestees and prisoners. But those can be dealt with by the mechanisms I propose, without qualified immunity.

1 Like

That’s a very important question that would require much more thought and more experience than what I bring to the party.

1 Like

There’s the problem. That and public expectations.

There’s a lot of qualified immunity for soldiers. SOFA is a big one.