In the United States, qualified immunity is a judicial doctrine created by the Supreme Court that protects government actors for actions taken while acting in their official capacity unless they violate "clearly established" statutory laws or constitutional rights.[1] The Court argued that because the discovery and trial process can be emotionally draining and financially overwhelming, the “clearly established” standard aims to ensure that government actors can do their jobs without the fear of frivolous lawsuits. Qualified immunity is not about preventing people from suing government actors, but rather, preventing lawsuits where a “clearly established” law or right violation has not been identified from proceeding for a full trial.
The doctrine has been subject to vigorous debate and controversy. Critics argue the doctrine has been exploited by those who abuse their power or engage in misconduct to argue they didn’t violate any "clearly established" law or right knowing it is a very difficult standard (which the Supreme Court made on purpose) for the plaintiff to meet.[2][3][4]
- ^ Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
:0was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
cops who killwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ "Policing the Police: Qualified Immunity and Considerations for Congress". crsreports.congress.gov. February 21, 2023. Retrieved December 1, 2024.