Intentionality The court intentionally decided that the protections of officers matter more than rights of the people, Reinhardt 15 Stephen R. Reinhardt, (Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.) The Demise of Habeas Corpus and the Rise of Qualified Immunity: The Court's Ever Increasing Limitations on the Development and Enforcement of Constitutional Rights and Some Particularly Unfortunate Consequences, 113 Mich. L. Rev. 1219 (2015). Available at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol113/iss7/3 [Premier] the evolution of qualified immunity¶ was not inevitable; it was the product As in the habeas context, doctrinal of a conscious choice to exempt constitutional¶ violations from civil liability because of a concern over other¶ lesser values. Court was concerned that officers not¶ face litigation and, Here, the purportedly harsh financial consequences for mistakes¶ ultimately, made in the line of duty. As a practical matter, this justification is based on a¶ false premise—that officers would pay for the liability they incur in civil¶ rights suits. As explained above, indemnification To the extent, that qualified immunity¶ serves a agreements generally shield¶ officers from any monetary harm. however, justifiable purpose of protecting officers from undergoing¶ litigation for innocent, reasonable mistakes, even in the absence of that purpose does not justify the extreme construction¶ of the Court’s any risk¶ of financial liability, qualified immunity doctrine—a construction that has once¶ again exalted a lesser concern over the protection of constitutional rights.
Intentionality The court intentionally decided that the protections of officers matter more than rights of the people, Reinhardt 15 Stephen R. Reinhardt, (Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.) The Demise of Habeas Corpus and the Rise of Qualified Immunity: The Court's Ever Increasing Limitations on the Development and Enforcement of Constitutional Rights and Some Particularly Unfortunate Consequences, 113 Mich. L. Rev. 1219 (2015). Available at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol113/iss7/3 [Premier] As in the habeas context, the doctrinal evolution of qualified immunity¶ was not inevitable; it was the product of a conscious choice to exempt constitutional¶ violations from civil liability because of a concern over other¶ lesser values. Here, the Court was purportedly concerned that officers not¶ face litigation and, ultimately, harsh financial consequences for mistakes¶ made in the line of duty. As a practical matter, this justification is based on a¶ false premise—that officers would pay for the liability they incur in civil¶ rights suits. As explained above, indemnification agreements generally shield¶ officers from any monetary harm. To the extent, however, that qualified immunity¶ serves a justifiable purpose of protecting officers from undergoing¶ litigation for innocent, reasonable mistakes, even in the absence of any risk¶ of financial liability, that purpose does not justify the Court’s extreme construction¶ of the qualified immunity doctrine—a construction that has once¶ again exalted a lesser concern over the protection of constitutional rights.
Premier-Debate-Brief-ND16.docx