The Supreme Court is rethinking qualified immunity, a blow against police state tyranny

At a time when Americans of all philosophical stripes seek greater government accountability, the Supreme Court is stepping up to deliver by reintroducing some common sense to the law.


USA Today: Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court provided the most recent signal that it’s rethinking the doctrine of qualified immunity — a rule the Court created in 1982 to shield government workers from constitutional accountability.

The case, McCoy v. Alamu, was filed by a Texas prisoner named Prince McCoy. Four years ago, a prison guard pepper-sprayed McCoy for no reason. The officer was agitated with another prisoner, who had twice thrown water at him. But because this other prisoner was out of reach, the guard took it out on McCoy, an innocent — and asthmatic — inmate. Video taken after the incident shows McCoy pacing his cell, unable to breathe.

McCoy sued, but until the Supreme Court intervened, he was denied justice. Courts at all levels had held that because there was not an earlier court case specifically stating that macing an innocent inmate is unlawful, the officer could not be held accountable for his actions.

These decisions are a product of this country’s perverse system of official accountability. Government workers who violate the constitution get to hide behind the doctrine of qualified immunity — in the news a lot because of the George Floyd killing — even if they act in bad faith or when their conduct is obviously wrong.

The doctrine is an automatic defense in a civil lawsuit, unless a plaintiff can show that there has been a case in the U.S. Supreme Court or in a relevant federal appeals court where the precise conduct at issue was held unconstitutional — in McCoy’s case, that it is unconstitutional to pepper-spray an inmate for nor reason, rather than tase or punch him.

If this sounds like putting form above substance, that’s because it is. Every reasonable human being, including a child, knows…read more…


Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. The first usurpation was the appointment of police chiefs by mayors and governors. The second was to give these gangs, qualified immunity.
    And the one that has evolved to protect the inner sanctum is the union contracts.
    The everyday oppression of the people through harassment and intimidation has evolved into a massive business that is an empire unto itself. They kill us for taillights.
    We are a violent culture, and police escalate all situations. Punishment is not supposed to be their job.

  2. That “qualified immunity” defense seems eerily similar to one of America’s “closest” ally’s policy towards all OTHERS.

Comments are closed.