Full text of the Ending Qualified Immunity Act

You can see the full text of the Ending Qualified Immunity Act here. Please consider adding your voice to the chorus for change by contacting your Federal representatives in the House and Senate and asking for support. We’ve put together an easy to use, and effective way to make your voice heard here.

What is Qualified Immunity? Why is it important?

Qualified immunity is not a law. It is a doctrine from court precedents (it is not a law). Through a series of cases, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has gradually provided for a special ability for government lawyers. Lawyers for government agents can have lawsuits dismissed or dropped by the judge before there is a trial. This isn’t available for citizens who are not government agents. The SCOTUS opinions express their logic that because doing government work is hard, the people who do it need to know they won’t have to face cases against them if they mess up in their government work in a way that violates someone’s civil rights. This goes beyond the frivolous lawsuit dismissals that already exists. The basic formulation is that Qualified Immunity applies if the government agent didn’t know what they were doing was a violation of the victim’s Civil Rights. The same immunity also applies if the government agent’s action was not “clearly established” (e.g. based on a very similar prior case within the same region).

Qualified Immunity Impacts Lawyers and Judges. Because plaintiff attorneys want to only bring cases they can win, this chills their motivation to sue government agents for violations of civil rights. Because judges don’t want their cases overturned by higher courts, they are more willing to apply Qualified Immunity, and dismiss cases. The standard that lower courts have adopted, which is derived from SCOTUS opinion, is to grant Qualified Immunity in nearly every case unless there is court precedent in the same region for the exact same reasons. Only then can you prove the government agent knew they were violating the victim’s Civil Rights. This is an impossibly high barrier.

Government Agents Are Not Held Accountable. Over the years, they have gotten away with progressively greater offenses against citizens’ Civil Rights without facing lawsuits. Because humans are motivated by incentives, removing the primary incentive to protect Civil Rights has led to a culture in government that places civil rights at the bottom of the priority list in a lot of jurisdictions.

When justice is supposed to be blind, Qualified Immunity is justice lifting her blindfold for a peek to see if the defendant works for the government, and if they do, refusing to proceed through our justice system.

The reason we want to #EndQualifiedImmunity is to put the blindfold securely back on Lady Justice, and not let the government justice system get a peek to see if it’s one of their own being charged to give themselves a free pass.

Ending Qualified Immunity is a justice multiplier, helping increase the impact of every other reform proposal.

Help End Qualified Immunity by writing your Representative to support this bill.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – With cities across America in turmoil over the death of George Floyd, a U.S. lawmaker plans to introduce legislation this week that he hopes will end a pattern of police violence by allowing victims to sue officers for illegal and unconstitutional acts.

U.S. Representative Justin Amash, a former Republican turned Libertarian, won support from a Minneapolis Democrat on Monday for his “Ending Qualified Immunity Act,” which would allow civil lawsuits against police, a recourse that the Supreme Court has all but done away with.

The high court’s adoption (here) of the qualified immunity doctrine has largely shielded police from financial settlements for victims or grieving families. The doctrine protects cops even when courts determine that officers violate civil rights, a Reuters investigation showed here

“The brutal killing of George Floyd is merely the latest in a long line of incidents of egregious police misconduct,” Amash told colleagues in a letter. “This pattern continues because police are legally, politically and culturally insulated … That must change so that these incidents stop happening.”

A black man, Floyd died a week ago after pleading for his life as a white Minneapolis policeman kneeled on his neck. Protesters angered by his death and by racial inequities have demonstrated for six straight nights.

Representative Ilhan Omar, a Minneapolis Democrat, intends to back the bill, according to an aide. Amash aims to introduce it on Thursday. It was unclear whether the legislation would gain support from the Congressional Black Caucus.

The bill joins a flurry of Democratic legislation in the House of Representatives and Senate. Democratic senators have pledged to introduce separate measures that would create a national registry for police misconduct and stop the transfer of military weaponry to local police departments.

“Be sure of this. We will propose and push for bold action,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said on Monday.

Republicans have condemned Floyd’s killing and voiced support for peaceful protests, but have largely steered clear of criticizing or echoing President Donald Trump’s harsh rhetoric toward violent protesters.

Republican Senator Tom Cotton tweeted that Trump should use the Insurrection Act to deploy military forces to cities to “ensure this violence ends tonight.”

A number of people have contacted us recently asking some form of the question “What can I do to help?”

We’re working on better answers, but for now we have this one that came from a Civil Rights lawyer working on a Qualified Immunity case before SCOTUS right now. We have a question for you at the end of this post, so please read thorough.

“The basic answer, I think, is that qualified immunity was created by the Supreme Court, and it is the Supreme Court’s job to fix it. There is still some hope that they will–the Court has not yet moved on our case or on any of the other qualified-immunity cases currently pending–and we at IJ are committed to pressing the issue forward.

But it’s also true that, while Congress did not create the problem, Congress is absolutely empowered to fix it. I know Justin Amash has only just introduced a bill that would undo qualified immunity (the first such bill I know of, despite the fact that people have been decrying the doctrine for years). If someone wants something to do now, today (as distinct from the kind of long-term change that litigators like me aim for), they can call their representative and senators and ask where they stand on qualified immunity. If your senators or representative are against qualified immunity, it’s worth asking where their bill to fix it is and whether they plan to co-sponsor the Amash bill.

In the meantime, we’re going to do our best to be the tip of the spear on this issue in the courts, and support from the community will be invaluable as we do. Thank you again for your work on the problem.”

The lawyer here works for The Institute for Justice, and you can find out more about them and donate here: https://www.ij.org/

Would it help if End Qualified Immunity set up a “letter writing campaign” (or whatever they’re called in 2020) to help you contact your representatives at all levels to ask about their position on Qualified Immunity? To ask them to support Justin Amash’s bill? Please share your thoughts below.

Are there any other ideas that you think we should be exploring to help facilitate change in this area?

If you haven’t already, please sign up for email updates so we can stay connected when the social media system doesn’t.

#EndQualifiedImmunity

Would you like infrequent updates on ending Qualified Immunity? Join us here.