Supreme Court sides with police officers in qualified immunity cases

Critics believe it shields law enforcment from accountability

WASHINGTON, D.C. (KYMA, KECY/CNN) - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of police officers seeking qualified immunity from allegations of excessive force on Monday. In two cases, justices overturned lower court decisions that went against law enforcement.

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields law enforcement from liability for constitutional violations.

According to Cornell Law School, “Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment, distraction and liability when they perform their duties reasonably.” 

It is not immunity from having to pay money damages, but rather an immunity from having to go through the costs of a trial as a whole. Courts are encouraged to resolve qualified immunity issues as early in a case as possible.

Critics say the doctrine is not grounded in the proper legal authorities, and too often shields officers from accountability.

And unless people claiming excessive force can find a prior case, with nearly identical facts, that shows the conduct at issue was unconstitutional; under existing precedent, an officer is not liable, even if he or she violates the constitution.