Qualified Immunity: The Dangerous Shield Protecting the Wrong People

Published on 23 September 2024 at 15:09

Imagine a society where the rules aren’t applied equally. Where, instead of justice for all, some folks are shielded from accountability while others face the full brunt of the law. It sounds like something out of a dystopian novel, right? Unfortunately, it’s real, and it’s happening right here in America. The culprit? A court-created doctrine known as qualified immunity, which grants government officials—particularly law enforcement—an extraordinary level of protection, making them practically untouchable, no matter how blatant their violations of people’s rights may be.

What is Qualified Immunity?

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that was created by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967. The idea was simple: to protect government officials, particularly law enforcement officers, from being sued unless they violated “clearly established” constitutional rights. The thinking was that officers need some protection while making split-second decisions in dangerous situations, without the fear of being sued hanging over their heads.

But here’s the catch: over time, qualified immunity has morphed into something far more insidious. Today, it often means that unless a prior court has already ruled that nearly identical conduct is unconstitutional, officers cannot be held accountable. That’s right—unless someone has already done the exact same thing and a court has already called it out, the offending officer walks away scot-free.

A History of Erosion

When it was first introduced, qualified immunity was seen as a necessary safeguard. But as with many well-intentioned ideas, it’s gone terribly wrong. Over the decades, court rulings have expanded the protection so broadly that it’s become almost impossible to hold government officials accountable for their actions.

This is how we end up with cases where law enforcement officers, having violated someone’s constitutional rights in ways that should shock the conscience, face no consequences because no other court has ruled on the exact same fact pattern. It’s a legal loophole of the worst kind, shielding bad actors from justice.

Who’s Really Above the Law?

Now think about what this means in practice. We have a system where one group of people—those wearing a government badge—can, in many cases, get away with doing things that would land the rest of us in jail or at least in court. Qualified immunity has essentially created a class of individuals who are “above the law.”

And that’s exactly the problem. America is supposed to be the land of equality, where the rule of law applies to everyone equally. Yet, with qualified immunity, the rule of law is bent, leaving everyday citizens vulnerable while allowing those in power to evade accountability. This unequal application of justice undermines the very foundation of our legal system.

Why We Must Eliminate It

The call to eliminate qualified immunity is not some fringe idea. It’s about restoring fairness and accountability to our justice system. It’s about sending a clear message that no one—absolutely no one—is above the law.

When bad actors in law enforcement know that they won’t face consequences for violating people’s rights, what incentive is there for them to change their behavior? If we want to see better policing and more trust between communities and law enforcement, qualified immunity must go. Accountability leads to better behavior. If officers knew they could be held responsible for their actions, we would see more thoughtful, constitutional policing.

A Beacon of Hope: New Mexico’s Civil Rights Act

In New Mexico, we’ve already made strides toward leveling the playing field. In 2021, we passed the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, which did something revolutionary: it abolished qualified immunity at the state level. This landmark legislation gave citizens the right to sue state and local government officials who violate their constitutional rights.

This act was a major victory for civil rights and justice. It showed that we can hold our public servants accountable without hindering their ability to do their jobs. Critics claimed that eliminating qualified immunity would bankrupt cities with lawsuits or scare officers away from the profession. Guess what? None of that happened. New Mexico’s law enforcement officers are still on the job, still protecting their communities. But now, they do so with the understanding that they must respect the rights of the people they serve.

New Mexico has proven that eliminating qualified immunity is not only possible but also beneficial. It creates a more just society by ensuring that everyone is held to the same standards under the law.

The Path Forward

If we want to restore trust in law enforcement and government institutions, eliminating qualified immunity is a crucial first step. It’s time to stop protecting the bad actors and start protecting the citizens. The New Mexico Civil Rights Act is a model for other states—and even the federal government—to follow. This isn’t just about police reform; it’s about justice, equality, and the rule of law.

The question we must all ask ourselves is simple: Do we want a society where some people are above the law, or do we want a society where everyone is held accountable? The answer should be obvious. Let’s end qualified immunity and make sure that in America, no one is above the law.

 

Written By: Stephen Despin Jr. | Founder/Contributor

Add comment

Comments

There are no comments yet.