Why Won’t the Supreme Court Hold Police Accountable?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 июл 2024
- This term the U.S. Supreme Court closely considered eight different petitions dealing with the controversial doctrine of qualified immunity. Ultimately, it denied them all. In this episode, we talk about what the Court’s decision means for IJ’s fight for police and government accountability-and where we go from here.
ij.org/podcasts/deep-dive-pod...
Hear about the cases, issues, and tactics advancing the fight for freedom-directly from the people on the front lines. Deep Dive with the Institute for Justice explores the legal theories, strategies, and methods IJ uses to bring about real world change, expanding individual liberty and ending abuses of government power. In each episode, host Melanie Hildreth talks with litigators, researchers, and activists to give listeners an in-depth, inside look at cutting-edge legal and policy issues-and how they affect the lives of ordinary Americans everywhere..
iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/35xKoi0...
Google: www.google.com/podcasts?feed=...
Sticher: www.stitcher.com/podcast/inst...
iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/deep-dive-with-the-institute-for-justice/id1480726134
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/35xKoi0948xMAEW45Wzga7
Google: www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9pai5vcmcvZmVlZC9kZWVwLWRpdmUv
Sticher: www.stitcher.com/podcast/institute-for-justice-2/deep-dive-with-the-institute-for-justice?refid=stpr
I knew judges were immuned from being sued and I was/still is totally disgusted by it, but I didn't know the extent of Qualified Immunity and I'm literally at a loss for words to learn this information.
Wicked people in high places must be dealt with by God fearing people in high places, and obviously there's no God fearing people that are government officials, smh! 🥴✌🏽❤
You need to bring this case where this Lady had her outright owned home taken away from her that a tree had fallen on,they do not even have any legal laws to do this ,this is corrupt Goverment and none legal Courts at work and this needs to be brought to the attention of the President,I am quite serious this Lady who has been fighting for ten years for a house that they had absolutely no right to rule on as it was her out right owned property that had suffered accidental damage the Courts have done nothing but Make this womans life a shameful horror story with no legality and the President needs to be told about this and this abuse of power stopped..and maybe get this very wronged lady compensation for her destroyed home....
FRAUD ALERT - QUICK REVIEW
tinyurl.com/yc9nd7n9
Hello, I need help…
a few years ago the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office started to try to Peg my son is a radical extremist and they literally have on their records that he is 1096 delusional and he's pointing guns at office....
My son is called on many occasions to try to get it remedied or clarify or find out exactly who's responsible for the accusations and they always start arguing with him in fighting with him instead of helping him to resolve the issue...
They had me believing that he's crazy for quite a long time...
But then I Witness first hand on many occasions Montgomery County Sheriff's Office and their courts do exactly the opposite of anything that any realistic saying person would do...
I am currently living in conditions where we feel 24/7 imminent threat and in danger for our safety because of the carelessness and recklessness of all associated parties, not listed to, Brett Ligon, rand Henderson, Keith Stewart, Tina long, and many more...
FRAUD ALERT:
I'M TERRIFIED, CAN'T SLEEP, AND AFRAID TO GO OUT
Think is the real reason the attacked my house…
To cover up their fraud…
GO TO odyssey.mctx.org/County/Search.aspx?ID=100
OR DO A MONTGOMERY COUNTY(TEXAS) COURT RECORDS SEARCH.
GO TO 'CRIMINAL' SEARCH
IN RED LAST NAME BOX TYPE "SMITH"
AND SEE STRAWMAN ACCOUNTS...
TRY THAT WITH "JOHNSON", AND "JONES".
GO TO 'CASE # SEARCH' AND ENTER - 27998
IT WILL LEAD TO FORTEZ, BRIAN D
OPEN CASE AND THERE IS A PDF FILE "02/11/1982"
OPEN THAT AND SEE THAT IT WAS STAMPED IN THE YEAR 2020
27998 IS THE START(AT LEAST IN MY INVESTIGATION)"
AND IT GOES AS FAR AS
61197 MCBRIDE, ALAN DALE
(FROM MY LITTLE RESEARCH)
THE FOLLOWING IS AN EVENT THAT OCCURRED ON 2020-06-26IN IT'S ALL TIED TOGETHER. THE WARRANT WAS SERVED FOR A FICTITIOUS
WE HAVE TINA LONG TESTIFY
****TINA LONG (COURT ADMIN)CONFESSES TO LYING
WHICH LED TO SWAT ATTACK tinyurl.com/ya2pj38t
PUBLIC-INTERNATIONAL-CLAIM-NOTICE: CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY CREATING TERRORISTIC SWAT ATTACK -- A, WELL NOTIFIED, FICTITIOUS WARRANT, INTENTIONALLY SERVED BY SWAT -- OUR ACCUSATION (CRIMINALLY CREATED TO ATTACK AND MURDER MY SON). --- TINA LONG OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY COURT 5 (TEXAS) CONFESSES - VIEW THE ATTACK AND HEAR CONFESSION ---- tinyurl.com/ya2pj38t
FRAUD ALERT - QUICK REVIEW
tinyurl.com/yc9nd7n9
they dont hold so called po lice accountable due to the fact the so called citizens dont demand it .
This crap is exactly why Gov Whitmer of Michigan violates the constitution with impunity.
Qualified immunity is literally one of if not the most unconstitutional thing in America...literally gives government a pass on injustice lol.
If you pay tax then bureaucrats serve you
No?
@@tictoc5443 HELL NO! Taxation is theft! If you vote, it's self-enslavement.
Immunity after the fact is impunity before the fact and cannot be ethical. Legal fictions are always incompatible with justice. Also, there's an army of legislators creating new laws every single day, and an army of judges and lawyers arguing about what it means every single day, and it's literally impossible to keep track. Imagine living in a country where ignorance of the infinitely complex law is no excuse unless you're charged with upholding it.
federal immunity is by far worse.
This is no laughing matter.
I can answer that with one word: Corruption.
"The world is full of great criminals with enormous power, and they are in a death struggle with each other. It is a huge gang battle, using well-meaning lawyers and policemen and clergymen as their front, controlling papers, means of communication, and enrolling everybody in their armies." Thomas Merton 1954
The word Government actually means mind control. It is etymologically originated from the ancient Latin language.
It Splits into two words:1) (guvernare) meaning “to control” and 2) (mens or mentis) meaning “mind”.
SO GOVERNMENT MEANS “TO CONTROL THE MIND”
Facts
And it's all legal! Optics be damned.
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS RIDICULOUS!
@@louskunt9798 the corrupt police unions have turned police departments into a criminal organization that hides behind qualified immunity to commit crimes and murder!!!
Qualified Immunity needs to be abolished, no one is above the law
And didn’t we hear that rally cry from our congress “no one is above the law”, but congress makes laws...for them and theirs then the rest of us
No one is above natural law. Everyone is above positive law. We just rather be slaves to the system.
Here's a solution I think will work: do away with qualified Immunity.
Make all Leo's bonded, similar to what nurses and doctors have in malpractice insurance.
When a cop has too many complaints, the bonding company will no longer insure him or her and then they will have to find another profession. Violate someone's rights, sue the officer, Department, Bonding Company.
"The world is full of great criminals with enormous power, and they are in a death struggle with each other. It is a huge gang battle, using well-meaning lawyers and policemen and clergymen as their front, controlling papers, means of communication, and enrolling everybody in their armies." Thomas Merton 1954
The word Government actually means mind control. It is etymologically originated from the ancient Latin language.
It Splits into two words:1) (guvernare) meaning “to control” and 2) (mens or mentis) meaning “mind”.
SO GOVERNMENT MEANS “TO CONTROL THE MIND”
You are absolutely right.
The people chosen to enforce the law must be held to a higher standard and be more accountable than an "ordinary" citizen. Anything else destroys the Bill of Rights.
I would be happy if they were just held to the *_same_* standard. But Qualified Immunity doesn't allow even *_that._* 😠
AMEN 😢😢
THE ENFORCEMENTS-PEOPLES FEAR THE STANDARDS OF CITIZENS. THEY HOLD THEMSELVES AS FASCISTS, BEYOND AND THE ABOVE ACCOUNTABILITY, MUCH LIKE A TURNIP FARMER CONSIDERS THE RIGHTS OF TURNIPS. CONSUABLES!
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY:
The Supreme Court won't correct or rescind their 1982 sweeping law. It's a law in which government officials and employees don't have to be held accountable for their actions - much like the Supreme Court.
And 'round and 'round we go.
The courts have not been enumerated any lawful power whatsoever to make law. They can hear controversies lawfully brought before their court and issue OPINIONS which apply ONLY to the parties to the controversy. The judiciary has UNLAWFULLY USURPED powers not enumerated them! They're all felons.
Having a lifetime appointment needs to be reviewed. The longer they stay in this bubble of theirs, the less they can relate to their peers. You know, regular average people like us...
The Supreme Court think they’re superior to their citizens because of their name LOL
The constitution only protects the People Elected Officials...so the police do not qualify under the constitution or any one else for that matter..elected officials can only be prosecuted under the impeachment rules of the constitution..
Not a law. That would be Legislating from the bench. Seperation of powers does not give the judicial branch legislative powers.
Treating case law as law is unconstitutional as well.
Each case is unique and heard on it's own merits.
This is why the country is being destroyed. Our ignorance. We have forgotten who we are and what we are!
Do you know your legal status.
Are you man who created government to be a benefit and not a harm.
Or are you their citizen and thus their creation and they extend their territory through you as their agent.
We are not taught legal English and we do not speak their language. I believe the Constitution states that laws must be in plain english and the context of that law must be clear. Otherwise if it is convoluted and confusing it is no law at all. I do know that any law written that conflicts with the constitution is null and void upon its creation.... to be treated as if it never existed.
As george carlin once said. The govt is one big club. And we are not in it.
Actually he was speaking about the club that is Freemasonry. Instead of burning the cities, burn, end your local Masonic Lodges. Freemasonry is Judaism for the Gentiles. End Israel as well. Know thy true enemy!!!!
Then the real question is how to get in the club.
That is an excuse. A cowardly copout to do nothing.
@@YaroslavKostrov To be one, ask one. @leebob86 is crazy. He probably believes that man never landed on the moon, that Elvis is alive and that flouride in water was a big conspiracy.
"The world is full of great criminals with enormous power, and they are in a death struggle with each other. It is a huge gang battle, using well-meaning lawyers and policemen and clergymen as their front, controlling papers, means of communication, and enrolling everybody in their armies." Thomas Merton 1954
The word Government actually means mind control. It is etymologically originated from the ancient Latin language.
It Splits into two words:1) (guvernare) meaning “to control” and 2) (mens or mentis) meaning “mind”.
SO GOVERNMENT MEANS “TO CONTROL THE MIND”
If the local/ state/ federal government will not execute justice on behalf of its citizens, the citizens must then execute justice for themselves by imposing their own punishment upon violators and removing and replacing by any means necessary any government institution that refuses to do its duties.
Not sure if you purposefully used the word “execute” as a tongue in cheek pun, but it fits nicely as it pertains to government personnel with the notion of the people enacting Justice. 😉
@@mikeradu2010 Assassination is one of the most effective political tools in the people's toolbox and was used frequently in mankind's past. That's why our OUTLAW governments have denigrated it and insist it's never justified.
@RKBA - I don’t disagree. In 1787, Thomas Jefferson said that “the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. God forbid we should ever be 20 years with such a rebellion.” For my part, I think we should at least start by bringing back tarring & feathering politicians & government personnel when deserved, which is more often than one might think. LOL 😂 But seriously, .......
The Battle of Athens Tn, Aug. 1 & 2 1946 & a 1992 Hallmark movie on this is on you tube, titled An American Story about this armed insurrection!
It's time for an overthrow... Even the US government can be overthrown by its own people when properly assembled... Build a citizen's militia.if your actions support the Constitution than veterans will join suit. Then it's purely government versus people... The government would never win this battle...
I did almost 8 months in jail and was innocent and when I had my preliminary hearing the arresting officer stated that No one, not the victim or witnesses ever told him I was the perp that he got me name off his police profile and just assumed I was the perp. There was no evidence at all. I ended up getting hit in the testicles my a deputy while in custody and getting nerve damage. After my preliminary hearing all charges were dropped but the out come was my losing my job, and my career, needing nerve treatments, hernia surgery, and physical therapy and every lawyer I try to talk with and get help from just tell me the officer has qualified immunity and that there is nothing I can do about the time and pain this officer put me through.
Wow. You endured a lack of procedural due process waiting so long for a preliminary hearing.
Jeez, you went through a lot. You should have been able to get a lawyer to take your case. Does your state have qualified immunity too, or can you sue the cop for gross negligence and intentional torts in a state court?
@@edwardmiessner6502 I know in Colorado, there is qualified immunity for police, but I needed a lawyer to help me prove that the officer lied in the affidavit and that is how I got arrested. The officer said that all witnesses and victims stated my specific full name, when in reality none of them ever said my name. The officer was given a nick name and he looked up the nick name on the police profile and since I was a parolee the officer said I had to be the perp even after I told them I didn’t know what they were talking about and that I was going to prove it in court. Instead of letting me go to court to prove that I was innocent the officer made up charges against me that he was able to arrest me for. After my preliminary hearing all charges were dropped by the DA . No lawyer that I talked with would even consider helping me sue, saying that the officer had qualified immunity and he would not even get in trouble for lying under oath. So I couldn’t proceed to take legal action against the police officer.
Thank you for fighting back. What kind of government have we when they can pass laws that make themselves exempt from the constitution. Truly infuriating.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
SCOTUS will NEVER change their mind on qualified immunity until one of them actually has it happen to them.
^^^ THIS! ^^^
Or until a President with balls starts locking up judges for conspiracy to deny rights. Lower courts would stop using QI real fast after that.
TIC-TOK THE MILAGE OF THE GRIFTED RV MAY HAVE A PUBLIC CITIZEN REALITY OF TERM LIMITTED JUSTICE ON A JUSTICE.
when libertarians oppsed RICO we were "pro crime", when we opposed the expansion of police and armed agents we were just conspiracists. From surveillance to brutality, no one listened. do they hear us now?
No
"Did you say something?"
No they don't. They think we're stupid for believing in freedom.
All 50 states in the USA
Got crazy?
Just turn it around. Cops say, "If you're innocent, you've got nothing to hide, so you should answer my questions." But they are encouraged to lie to citizens. All a cop has to do to NOT NEED qualified immunity is to do the job according to existing laws and the rules promulgated by the state and the organization that hired and trained the cop.
I abhor the idea that qualified immunity depends on a "clearly established" point of law in exact parallel when it is clearly established - by legislated law rather than judicial fiat - that the particular point in question is not only immoral, but also illegal. There even is, apparently, a statement that qualified immunity does NOT apply to the "clearly incompetent" official or to a "clear violation of law." Basically, it seems, all qualified immunity means is that officials, particularly law enforcement officers, are, unfortunately, above the law they swore to uphold and enforce.
14th Amendment can be used to pierce "qualified immunity" of unlawful state actors. The Magna Carta in 1215 established in Anglo-Saxon law that no "person" is above the law, including the King. It was presented to King John at the end of the swords of 40 Barons and their supporters on the field of Runnymede.
@@rkba4923
immunity is to work outside the constitution by calling violating rights, their job
the constitution says, a legal government can only exist under the constitution, not outside it
if the courts grant no remedy but only for themself, the constitution proscribes the 2nd most important right
@Writer In Fact Well said and I agree. I used to love cops, had many good friends who were cops. But everything has flipped and the entire government is corrupted. We are left with only one Constitutional remedy and we can't depend on cops to help. Hopefully the military is still dedicated but I'm beginning to wonder about them also. The generals certainly don't give me much hope.
The next few years are going to be a wild ride. But I have no fear. I would rather die standing on my feet than live on my knees. I only kneel to God. And it's getting dangerous to make statements like that. The 1st Amendment has died, they're working on the 2nd. I'm old, but that only means I should be on the front lines. I volunteered in 1974 and I willingly volunteer again. My wife doesn't like it, but she doesn't understand the danger. She will.
Answer for the LEOs: "I refuse to waive my rights! Am I under arrest? If not, I'm leaving."
"When they are enforcing a law" - So if they are attacking someone who is innocent of any crime, then they are effectively not enforcing any law, they are just abusing their power. The law that needs to change is when they have the right to enforce a particular law; there must be a balance between their power and their evidence.
"When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is Liberty" didn't Thomas Jefferson say this? If honest citizens can no longer petition for redress then we're screwed.
There is no evidence that he wrote it or any of it's variations at all. In short, no he did not say it.
John Basil Barnhill
People are going to start to take the law into their own hands. They will get their revenge. One can take so much of injustices.
Hey Omen Nemo@ the so called supreme court's have turned their backs on the American citizens.
The have chosen to protect the very same wyt cops that deliberately pick fights with innocent black and brown people then kill them and call it justified!!!
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, *make violent revolution inevitable."* - JFK
Bingo
"No justice, no peace."
They don't hold themselves accountable let alone law enforcement
michael Burton if they ended QA their immunity might be next....so they will not kick that rock might cause a landslide.
All the same clubs cpool
Amend the constitution to strip away any and all forms of qualified immunity and the courts will have no question but to uphold the laws of the land...
Check out "No Treason: Constitution of No Authority" by Lysander Spooner. Think you might like it.
We dont need a constitutional amendment. What we need is a way to back these crook mugs up off of us.
Constitution doesn't talk anywhere about the government being immune. Its the supreme court's "lords of justice" who were convinced that it is so obvious that the constitution didn't need to mention it. So you think they won't do the same even when constitution is ammended.
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS A TITLE OF NOBILITY CRIME!
GRANTING POWER TO A GROUP OC PEOPLE, YET DENYING THOSE SAME PPWERS TO EVERYBODY ELSE!
QUIT YELLING!!!
@@bubbajones4522 PC IS SO PASSE' TRY THE WAKE-UP TO WOKE! WATCH HYSTERIA AT 9 PM TV-S DUH-DEBATES.
That's horrible that something outrageous and egregious needs to happen in order for Qualified Immunity reform to be considered or changed. That is horrifying to even imagine what that "thing" will be.
Here's a solution I think will work: do away with qualified Immunity.
Make all Leo's bonded, similar to what nurses and doctors have in malpractice insurance.
When a cop has too many complaints, the bonding company will no longer insure him or her and then they will have to find another profession. Violate someone's rights, sue the officer, Department, Bonding Company.
The sad thing is, case info and access is often locked behind a Lexus Nexis server or some other paywall, so researching other cases will be prohibitively expensive for any regular person.
What they did with the qualified immunity doctrine was essentially declare that nothing from that point forward could ever be ruled to be a violation of the constitution that hadn't already been previously ruled as such.
We are heading for a Revolution if this government doesn't wake up and start respecting the citizens rights.
Sad state of affairs.
Thank you very much for everything you've done for civil liberty!
Truly appreciate it!
To answer your question: If the Supreme Court held those government agents accountable then that leads to a slippery slope to hold all Judges and Justices accountable for not following the Rule of Law. Judges serve the sole interest of government and not the “We the People” interest.
When is the supreme court going to be held accountable? Sullivan for instance.nobody is above the law.if people gets immunity then law is useless.
CORRECT!
Even when you make the law to do so, the supreme courts will strike it down deeming it unconstitutional and just make up anything out of thin air, pretty much just like qualified immunity.
They also denied 10, 2A cases (adding to a list of dozens already)! What need do we have for a court that refuses to hear our Petitions for Redress nor perform their duties as a CHECK on the other branches OF GOVERNMENT? They've basically indicated, you have the right to Petition for Redress but we have NO DUTY to hear your petitions! Also, since "qualified immunity" is a "judicial creation," it is NOT "law". The judiciary has not been enumerated any power whatsoever to "make law."
When will Americans learn you have rights until the government decides you don't? And until Americans take up arms and fight back against our tyranical government we have only ourselves to blame.
Sadly true. The Supreme Court has decided they have no duty to hear the People's Petitions for Redress of Grievances. They've refused to hear dozens of 2nd Amendment cases allowing unconstitutional, and therefore unlawful, lower court OPINIONS to stand and continue to be enforced against INNOCENT Americans at the muzzle of LE's guns. They just refused TEN more 2A cases and, now, eight more "qualified immunity" ones. Good grief. They're going to MAKE US shoot them in their faces, I fear.
Kill em All - Metallica
We will need the ex military personnel, the ones who will actually honor the oath. ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC!!!
Government, (meaning mind control) is the enemy, controlled by Freemasonry and Israel. The original definition of TERRORISM is GOVERNMENT by INTIMIDATION.
@@leebob86 it's being controlled by Russia too through trump, Moscow Mitch, Leningrad Lady G, and the NRA
You don't beat an army buy fighting them at the game they rule.
You beat an empire from within.
Learn the weak points of the giant and you will become the change you want to see.
mayors, city commissioners, governors etc need to have their immunity stripped too. all these clowns do is fine, revoke licenses , or have you arrested (and now locked in your home and business shut down aka corona virus) and no worries for them about being punished for their garbage!
When the law becomes this idiotically and deliberately convoluted,
anarchy starts looking like a reasonable alternative.
No it doesn't. The expansive interpretation of QI is wrongheaded. Anarchy means mob rule where only force determines outcomes.
@@stevealexander8010 I was being sarcastic...
@@stevealexander8010 Learn what anarchy actually means. You sound like a dumb ass.
Well I feel the qualified immunity isa terrorists attack
@@stevealexander8010 No it doesn't dumbass. It means "without rulers" you've been so brainwashed by television you haven't even looked up the definition.
I wanna add that I believe that police dept's that are still working without body cams or dash cams are knowingly allowing corruption. There is no reason or excuses theses days that one can continue to operate in this manner. It seems to me that those dept's who still have not required these cams are requiring the people to record their interactions to hold the police accountable and that is wrong. it should not be the people who should have a camera on hand everywhere they go in case of a police interaction. In court the police are given the benefit of doubt when there are conflicting statements. People have had it with all the lies that have ruined lives of Innocent people due to false police statements. Cases ruled in favor of the the police with no way to prove them wrong without video is just wrong and needs to be corrected immediately.
THERE ARE DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE BODY CAMS BUT THE COPS WILL SHUT THEM OFF OR NOT TURN THEM ON OR WILL SHUT DOWN THE MIC. IN ALL OF THESE CASES DO TO WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE WORLD TO DAY THOUSE CASES SHOULD BE THROWN OUT CAUSE THE COP IS TRYING TO HIDE SOMETHING. I HAVE SEEN CASES WHERE THEY SHUT OFF AUDIO SO THEY CAN GET THERE STORIES STRAIGHT AND THAN THEY WRITE THERE REPORTS BUT SOME DUMB (REALY SMART COP) COP DIDN'T SHUT THERES OFF AND THE REAL STORY COMES OUT. NOT ONLY SHOULD THESE COPS BE FIRED BUT SHOULD LOSE THERE LICENCE TO BE A COP AND ANY SENIOR OFFICER TRY TO HIDE ANY WRONG DOING NEEDS TO GO AS WELL AND ALL SHOULD LOSE THERE PENSIONS. WE HAVE A LOT OF GOOD PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WOULD MAKE GREAT COPS AND THERE ARE GOOD COPS TOO BUT THEY ARE KEEPING THERE HEADS DOWN CAUSE IF THEY SAY ANY THING THEY ARE CHASED OFF OR SHOW UP DEAD IN A SINGLE CAR ACCADENT OR ARE SHOT BY FRIENDLY FIRE WHEN ENTERING A HOME UNDER FIRE AND NO WARRENT....
Even when you record the police the officers might order you to erase it or do it themselves. It doesn't mean they're legally allowed to, though.
Unfortunately if they pull you over and try to rob you then they are robbers not cops and unfortunately bad things can and will happen
I’d love to see an reasonable & rational argument for Qualified Immunity from the cowards that give this video a thumbs down 👎 without any explanation as to why they disagree.
@KI time - *NO* That’s not a good example or equivocation. Prosecutors give Transactional Immunity on a case-by-case basis, but if it’s found that you lied in your testimony, that immunity can be revoked and you can be charged for perjury (in addition to what it was you were given immunity to begin with). Cops can lie and not get charged for doing so, and so much more.
There is no rationale for qualified immunity. Anyone who thinks they deserve such an unconstitutional right deserves to be strung out until dead. What did Thomas Jefferson say, if you're willing to sacrifice liberty for temporary security than you deserve neither liberty nor security, I know I butchered that quote but it's something like that...
@@mervinsecure1cambricsecure957 and when will us so called citizens band together and actually take a stand and do it . never thats when .
@@carmichaelmoritz8662 They tried, but for the wrong reasons. Jan. 6th.
Omg - this is crazy!!!! This law seems to be unconstitutional!!
"Case Law" gives judges untethered power... See "QI" and "Abortion" "Civil Asset Forfeiture"...
If we don't contest it...
By building lynching stations for corrupt judges... they're not above us... they're public servants...
Power they unlawfully usurped!
The principle is based on: what they get away with once, they will get away with in the future. And this is ratified by juries who evidently are unaware the verdicts they render aren't just relative to a defendant's guilt or innocence, but future cases decided by precedent.
I would love to see a video to explain how Qualified Immunity as case law can coexist with the actual statute about "Deprivation of rights under color of law" (18 US Code 242). I really don't understand how the two coexist. If they can't coexist then why is separate legislation even needed to remove QI? I really don't understand how they argued around it successfully.
Conservatives moan about "legislating from the bench" but actually only complain when the courts make rulings they disapprove of while embracing rulings creating new law when it suits them. In 2021 bills were introduced by Democrats in the U.S. Congress to modify or eliminate qualified immunity but were defeated by Republican (law and order) opposition. So which political party is actually on the side of constitutional rights?
@@avsystem3142 neither
People vote their representatives and these representatives need to make the laws of the people. Not laws for themselves.
…where the Senate became a graveyard for legislation when under GOP control. They wouldn’t even bring up proposed laws to vote on because of their ‘Hastert Rule’. (And yes, that Hastert. )
What if they're not enforcing "law"? When did "judicial policy" become "law"? And, how?
Thank you for all you are doing to help there be liberty & justice for all. Constitution Sheriff Richard Mack said that for a law enforcement officer to break his oath makes him guilty of perjury. Maybe there needs to be law requiring law enforcement officers to be tutored regarding the Constitution and how to walk out their oaths. I can see places where the law would make sense. We have a Baker Act law in Florida designed with mercy in mind; it does take a person's Constitutional rights, but in a situation where the person is a danger to himself or others. However, across the state law enforcement has in epidemic proportions been using the law to participate with public school authorities to discipline school children and in other situations where they know very well there is no mental illness involved. There is a lot of money involved for the institutions who collect a lot of money from the victims' insurance and deductibles simply for warehousing "patients" for at least into three days so they can collect for three days.
Qualified immunity means above the law, period! That kind of power, like all power, attracts the worst and corrupts the best.
immunity is to work outside the constitution by calling violating rights, their job
the constitution says, a legal government can only exist under the constitution, not outside it
if the courts grant no remedy only for themself, the constitution proscribes the 2nd most important right
One might surmise the reason the Supreme Court is not interested in holding law enforcement accountable, is because that would require holding government actors accountable. The one thing our government despises the most is being held accountable. This includes but is not limited to the United States Supreme Court itself.
One of the biggest issues that I see comes in as the span of the years of "abuse" grows. The court will have to come up with a remedy that addresses the past abuses. Even if they put a cutoff date the lawsuits will continue.
SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO ENACT LAW!
THEY ONLY ARE AUTHORIZED TO VALIDATE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A LAW, BUT NO POWER TO WRITE OR ENACT ANY LAW!
Right wing activist judges don’t care about what laws actually say: it’s all about the outcome.
Since this doctrine the courts are being overwhelmed with 1983 cases. Police are hated. Malicious prosecution. Police lie in reports and commit perjury.
In a 1983 case an official was part in violation was not known and he got off but latter was arrested for embezzling the city. Oh I loved the photo of him walking into the court house. 😊
2:35 ESPECIALLY the IRS!
The irs isn't even a government agency... how you like them apples???
Time to protest outside the Supreme Court signs saying hear these cases. Be Ruth less!
The supreme court needs to be Gator Bait Ruth less.
Thank you for the work you do, on behalf of all Americans.
Like your videos, learn something from each one at least. This time, I learned that Qualified immunity was judicially created, thanks for the insights!
They recognize the power in the protection being granted to members of their class; it's a blanket protection of significant power. No one will eliminate or rescind it, in their position; having tasted power.
And because they offer no other benefit worthy to the risks of employment. It sets even the most honest human towards inevitable corruption, hate for other humans and the highest suicide rate of any profession. But you can take shit and treat people bad and get away with it. Who is that going to attract?
Just a note of thanks for all the great work yall do, you all are a truly making a difference in this nation thanks
PS if we're scared of them then they need to be scared of losing their house through lawsuits to keep them accountable and stay in honor
Imagine that: government swamp creatures reluctant to take away their own power to act lawlessly with abandon
There aren’t any government swamp creatures, those are just the monsters under your bed. Clearly the issue here is plainly corrupt legislators and corrupt police departments. There is no swamp to it, as it is all done in plain sight under ‘qualified immunity’. See video.
@@JoeOvercoat you wrongly assume many things not the least of which is that “swamp” implies a level of secrecy. Blather on if you will but you give me no reason to seriously consider your “correct” analysis. 🥱
Your rights do not come from a peace of parchment paper -- they come from God -- natural law. The Constitution does not provide rights. The constitution does however tells the ruling class what their limitations are. As we can see, it worked out well.
God is DEAD but SATAN AND HIS MINIONS AND DEMONS ARE ALIVE AND WELL IN D.C. and all government agencies!
I served with the police while attending college back in the 1970's. Back then we were considered "peace officers" guardians, protectors and servants of the people. The change of philosophy to "Law Enforcement Officer" always sends a literal chill up my spine, as I continue to hold the belief that a man's home should be considered sovereign. Only under the most grave circumstances should government agents be allowed to forcibly enter, unless with presentation of a signed warrant, or under exigent (emergency) circumstances where life is at risk. Moreover, I have listened to countless statements with uniformed goons, without badge number or name on their uniforms, breaking into homes before daybreak, destroying property without reason, murdering beloved pets, terrorizing children, elderly and innocent people. Enough! To my liking, they can sit outside the house until the desperado decides to leave, unless they have a signed warrant in hand and minimizing trauma to people, pets and property. For my take, eliminate qualified immunity and hold those personally liable for out of control and unnecessary actions!
One simple fix would be to require the lower courts to answer the constitutional question even if granting qualified immunity so that the prior established case law exists. There needs to be a "This can never happen again" that gives future litigants hope.
Please, everyone needs to read or listen to “The End of Policing” by Alex Viitale. Think we need police? Think again.
WE NEED COPS THAT FOLLOW THE LAW NOT WHAT THEY FEEL. BUT THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm in Australia and we don't have an equivalent legal provision.
Personally I think it is very bad, it is an open invitation to corruption and abuse
Do I understand correctly, both Thomas AND Sottomayor are interested in review of Qualified Immunity? As in, both the right AND the left have concerns over the doctrine?
*Title 18 USC 241 Conspiracy Against Rights & 18 USC 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law... Needs to be amended: Punishment shall be a Mandatory Minimum of 5 years in Prison and 5 Million Dollar Fine (Paid to the Victims) including all reasonable attorney fees. **_Ignorance, misinterpretation, misunderstanding, or mistake of the LAW shall not be an EXCUSE or Defense by any Government, Agency, or representative thereof!_** There shall be NO IMMUNITY or Statute of Limitations from these codes.*
*Let me tell you about your "Rights"... they are subject to Time, Place, and Manner as Dictated by your Masters! According to the 5th Circuit you don’t have the “Right” unless it is “Clearly Defined” by the Court!*
*You might as well use the US Constitution and Bill of "Rights" to wipe your ASS!*
Thank you for this video, so many insight into the issues that I didn't have knowledge for it before this.
I don't even live in America, and yet I'm so glad that our cops and authorities are not quite like this. There may be the odd occasional time where a police officer or whoever did something wrong or out of the ordinary, but not quite like this!
I just saw several videos of American authorities randomly carrying out forfeitures and others of them just taking all of an innocent families money randomly suspecting they were involved in crime when they did nothing wrong. I just thought, "You have to be kidding me, this is such a joke", our cops may occasionally do something wrong, but they're often more chill than this
Thank you for talking about this . I question the freedom of our citizenship given that we cannot prosecute those who abuse us insofar as there fails to be clearly established law, and the officer acts under the color of law .
Great discussion.. Both lawyers have wonderful points. Very pleasing to watch this video. The woman was gorgeous...
Doing away with QI now rests entirely on how well the IJ argues against the government and cops' appeal of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision for James King in King v Brownback to the Supremes. Basically what they're saying is that James King can't bring a lawsuit against two officers of a joint task force for violations of his Constitutional rights under the Bivens decision because he lost the FCTA portion of his lawsuit in US District Court for Western Michigan, virtually asking SCOTUS to cement the District Court decision into place as the law of the land.
The decision was a goofy decision that arose out of Mr King's three-pronged approach using three separate federal proviosions in order to be able to obtain justice. What it said was that his lawsuit under 42 US 1983 was invalid because the officers were acting under color of federal law, but he couldn't sue under the FCTA either because they were acting under color of state law without the judge weighing the merits of the case. The judge then ruled that Mr King cannot sue under the Bivens decision also because of her summary dismissal of the FCTA portion of Mr King's lawsuit. On appeal the three judge panel ruled that the District Court judge was right in dismissing the 42 US 1983 and FCTA portions of the lawsuit but permitted James to sue under the Bivens decision because the dismissal of the FCTA was not a final judgement since the District Court judge did not judge the case by its merits under the FCTA provisions, and stripped the officers of their qualified immunity.
If SCOTUS rules in favor of the cops, they will have made it impossible for anyone to bring these joint task forces to account because since they are acting under the color of both federal and state laws, they are entitled to the protections and immunities of *both* and are accountable to neither!
UPDATE: They ruled 9-0 in favor of the joint task force officers but gave IJ extra work to do. Odd directive in an opinion where Clarence Thomas seems to endorse the district court decision as "correct".
All should be held accountable. Either within the law or outside of the law.
As the founder of modern democratic policing, Sir Robert Peel said,
" The police are the public and the public are the police. Consent comes from the knowledge that your police officers are impartial and accountable for their actions."
On 29th September 1829 the first 1,000 Peel's policemen (AKA Peelers, later Bobbies) dressed in blue tail-coats and top hats, patrolled the streets of London.After he established a permanent police force in London, England.
Sir Peel went on to become Prime Minister - twice.
Peel's police uniform expressed that the police are not a military force, and officers did not carry guns. Later uniforms did changed, but Bobbies remain unarmed.
I’m in trouble right now because I had cash saved up in my house. I was accused of selling drugs(which is NOT true by the way). I was in a horrible car accident(hit by a drunk driver)and I now have to take prescription medication every day just to be able to function. My ex husband called the police and accused me of selling my medication(he was pissed about the court ordering him to pay child support). The police came into my house WITHOUT my permission OR A SEARCH WARRANT. They seized EVERY SINGLE PENNY THAT I HAD-literally, they even took loose change. I was charged with possession of a controlled substance(my PRESCRIBED MEDICATION) and arrested. I was given a $50,000 bond to get out of jail. The ONLY thing that I had was my prescribed medicine(and I had the correct amount). Now, I’m fighting to get my money back-the police are saying that “normal ppl” don’t keep cash in a safe in their house. That is the ONLY “evidence” that they have to “prove” that I was selling drugs. The fact that I had cash money in a safe in my home. I’ve spent the past year on home confinement waiting for a trial date-I was offered a “deal” by the cop who stormed my house. He came back to my house and told me that if I signed this forfeiture form that he’d brought with him for the money that he STOLE FROM ME, that he would drop the possession charge. I refused. I didn’t do anything wrong. I have proof from my bank statements showing that I’d withdrew that money from my bank account over a period of time. I did so in order to leave an abusive relationship. I also sold jewelry on Poshmark and have all paperwork for that as well. I don’t understand how despite having proof that shows EXACTLY where that money came from(and that it WASNT drugs) how the police were allowed to just come in and take it from me. And on top of all of that-the dirty cop didn’t even turn in the correct amount. Apparently he kept some for himself. How are they allowed to do this?! I didn’t allow him in my house, he didn’t have a warrant. ISNT that illegal?
Between them taking every penny that I had to my name, the bond to get out of jail, and the $300 I’m having to pay every month to be on home confinement while waiting for a trial date, I don’t have the money for an attorney. The public defender that I was appointed is the sister of the DA. She has done nothing but file continuations for a year now. Despite there being no evidence of a crime, she keeps pressuring me to take the deal. It makes ZERO sense to me. I was legally prescribed that medication for legitimate injuries. That was all that I had-my current VALID prescription and the correct amount of it. How was I breaking any laws by having money in my house?
Taking someone's money with out a crime doesn't that fall under being fined or whatever in an extreme beyond what's reasonable,? Because to decide to take your money with out a crime IS UNREASONABLE!
Is there a way to access the cases referenced for further reading!
Thank you guys so much for all the work you do
Qualified immunity as defined is far too broad and an outright affront to fair justice. Thank You IFJ.
Thanks for all your work, IJ! These videos are so informative.
On 2/29/20 off duty Sikeston MO officer Andy Cooper was drunk and driving his hellcat sports car around 100 miles per hour beside the kindergarten in Sikeston. He accelerated through a stop sign, his car struck another vehicle. The other car was occupied by a young married couple. The young man was severely injured and the young lady, 22 year old Abby Cohen, was killed nearly instantly.
Andy Cooper immediately received preferential treatment from the local police and prosecutor. He has never sat in a jail cell for his crime and was given a court date 881 days away from the crime he had obviously committed.
To say that the government is without responsibility to the law of the land violates the main purpose of government, that the courts purpose as stipulated in the constitution may not be violated by those whose duty it is to protect property from those violating private natural and inalienable rights cannot be nullified without abandoning the purpose of it's founding and directly violating the law
I will be giving the Institute For Justice a Sizeable Donation soon.
They are afraid they won't get protection . Best to penalize cops 15 percent of their pension instead of TAX PAYERS 🤑💰 money!! This should make them think twice!!!!
SO IT'S THE SUPREME COURT THAT CREATED THE DOUBLE STANDARD OF OUR LAWS THAT IS A CRIME.
The problem is They need to be held accountable as a private man. Sue indivdually as a man. Not a citizen or government official. Back to common law
Citizens being protected from the government is the whole point to the Bill of Rights. There should not be any exceptions. Only after enough bad cops violate the rights of enough government tyrants will the law be changed.
The English common law (which is the root of US law - bar Louisiana) has two concepts, misfeasance in public office, a civil tort and misconduct in public office, a crime (what you would call a felony) punishable by a maximum sentence of life in prison. I see no reason why these concepts should not apply in the United States and the several States (bar Louisiana).
"It's a big club and you ain't in it."
I don’t even understand the rational of qualified immunity for cops? If they’re negligent why shouldn’t they be liable like literally every single other profession?
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” ― Frederick Douglass
The court doesn't want to make big changes to our country if the government is use to infringing on your rights. They'll never make a ruling that says all traffic laws are only applicable to vehicles involved in commerce. It's sad that applying the law to the government would make too much of a fuss.
Qualified immunity, civil asset forfeiture, Terry V. Ohio, and Pennsylvania V. Mimms are in desperate need of overturning. The supreme court may move slow, but they've always fast tracked the concerns of the enforcer class. There is more than one SC decision that concluded they are not inclined lawfully to help or aid a civilian at all. They are completely obsolete in doing anything in The Peoples' interest, and that just stokes their enmity, ferocity and bellicosity towards Us. And We pay to be stalked, harassed, violated, brutalized and dehumanized. When they are held in the slightest accountable, We pay the settlement, and their attorney fees. When their departments and agencies have spent 10 times their entire budget in settlements, they start to deduct from the services and programs that do benefit us to funnel back to their racketeering.
3-branches of government, checks and balances... The US Congress can fix this by writing a law or series of laws Specifically outlawing certain behavior, or specifically outlaw "qualified immunity" altogether.
Now get enough congressmen to agree and get behind it.
The really messed up part is that they require a court decision but then dismiss cases before a decision. It would be less insane if qualified immunity required a case to go to decision but then the first government employee has a get out of jail free card.
Otherwise, how do we get the court decisions?
@0:42 Riddle me this, how did the first lawsuits come to be if the outcome relied on prior cases, when there weren’t any?
One of the key points is that most of the cases get dropped/blocked by judges in summary judgement so it becomes chicken and egg. Judges won't allow the cases to go forward so victims cannot point to a case that matches. One cop got qualified immunity for abusing a handcuffed man sitting on the ground. Why? The previous case had to do with a handcuffed man lying on the ground. Judge said previous case the guy was lying on the ground not sitting so it is not prior precedence. Drops the case so another cop can abuse victims in handcuffed as long as they are sitting.
"Lack of understanding the law is no excuse for breaking the law." - the government to the citizenry. Another example of "good for thee but not for me."
For every right we are supposedly gurenteed in our constitution there are 100s of amendments stripping Americans of them same rights. All throughout history governments have catered to the rich and shit on the masses
The legislature should amend the law to say "We have no intention of creating any form of immunity for government officials with this law." Court can't interpret its way around that.
I remember back in the day hearing what I know now was the spin for qualified immunity. And the reason, the propaganda to the public was to stop “frivolous lawsuits”. I was young and ignorant and back then didn’t know I should have been paying attention to such things.
I hope that one day all unjust abuse of we the people will end .
The very reason we have a separation of powers within the government branches is so something like this doesn't happen. The Supreme violated its authority when it created qualified immunity because the SCOTUS can't legislate. The job of the LEGISLATION is to make laws, NOT the SCOTUS. Their job and entire function is to determine if certain actions or laws adhere to the Constitution.
The job of the LEGISLATION is to make laws, which is CONGRESS, NOT the SCOTUS
THERE YOU GO NEED TO READ MY COMENT 5 MO LATER.
Even if 1 innocent family gets destroyed and the police and or da get away with it it's fundamentally immoral. Police take an oath to uphold the law and they knowingly and with full awareness incur risk to do their jobs. Under no circumstances should they be able to offset that risk on families who haven't taken that oath
Patrick Jaicomo is wrong. Between the 1800s and 1968, policing "worked" because all cops were white, all judges were white and all jurors were white. QI had nothing to do with the outcome. And here's where I really think the Patrick Jaicomos are wrong in their approach to QI issues. They're reactionaries, not effective advocates. We don't need QI to be deleted. We need Congress to create a separate courts to handle just QI cases, just like the military court system. I may still be in high school, but I can tell when an idea is flawed. But I love this video and the work IJ is doing. Keep it up, I may join you in 8 years, when I get my law degree.
just for the first two examples a normal person would end up years in prison. so why not cops? its the typical " oh its just illegal if others do it when we cops are doing it its totaly fine."
What happened to IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE .... if one of us commoners do something against the law it matters not if we know the law or not ..... & police & legislators (those that make law) judges (those that inflict punishments on law breakers) not only know or at very least should know the law & BE HELD TO AN HIGHER MEASURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY not be given a free pass because no one in government has been tried for breaking that law before ..... has a commoner been held accountable for that action before .... yes .... by whom .... oh the legislature (that passed the law) the police (that arrested the offender) the judge (that held them accountable & passed judgment on them & imposed a penalty for the infraction of said law ...... GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD NOT GIVEN A FREE PASS this type of action has lead to many an uprising including Scottish rebellion & the very revolutionary War of the USA (the govt tried to say we can have guns & you can't [the british went to Lexington & concord to confiscate musket. Ball powder & cannons ] & as they say "the rest is history" ....... 😢