Post by Admin on Jun 15, 2020 22:43:24 GMT
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday said he disagreed with a decision by other justices to ignore a case about "qualified immunity," the Supreme Court doctrine that often gives police officers accused of egregious misconduct a legal way to avoid personal accountability.
The doctrine has come under scrutiny in the wake of the death of George Floyd in the custody of the Minneapolis Police Department, an event that has caused the reexamination of a number of elements of the American criminal justice system. The court has consistently passed on qualified immunity-related petitions in recent years despite efforts to get the justices to consider the issue.
"I continue to have strong doubts about our ... qualified immunity doctrine," Thomas said in his dissent. "Given the importance of this question, I would grant the petition for certiorari."
The dissent by Thomas, the only black Supreme Court justice, is an indication that at least one member of the high court believes it should reconsider the doctrine that has been decried in recent years from both sides of the aisle -- from Senate Democrats to Trump Supreme Court shortlisters.
"I write separately to register my disquiet over the kudzu-like creep of the modern immunity regime," Trump Supreme Court shortlist member Don Willett said in a 2018 opinion for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. "To some observers, qualified immunity smacks of unqualified impunity, letting public officials duck consequences for bad behavior—no matter how palpably unreasonable."
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., registered her dislike of qualified immunity as Senate Democrats released a resolution on the doctrine this month.
"Law enforcement should not be completely shielded from accountability when they violate someone’s civil rights," she said. "It is clear that the Supreme Court’s qualified immunity doctrine is broken and in need of reform. It is time that we say clearly that police officers should be held accountable to the law and to the people they are sworn to protect, period."
And Carrie Severino, the president of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network -- which is regularly at odds with Harris and her fellow Senate Democrats -- lauded Thomas's dissent.
"The Supreme Court's approach to qualified immunity is a house of cards of judge made law dating back to the Warren Court," she told Fox News. "The interconnected doctrines are devoid of any originalist approach or reference to the common law, and Justice Thomas is right that the entire area of law is in need of re-examination."
Severino is a former clerk for the justice.
Thomas' opinion was short, technical and straightforward, a departure from some of the more florid opinions he and fellow justices sometimes put forward -- Justice Neil Gorsuch worked in a New York Yankees analogy to his opinion Monday on a case about gay and transgender rights. Thomas also didn't say he felt strongly about the issue one way or another, simply emphasizing that he thinks it's important the court address the question.
The doctrine has come under scrutiny in the wake of the death of George Floyd in the custody of the Minneapolis Police Department, an event that has caused the reexamination of a number of elements of the American criminal justice system. The court has consistently passed on qualified immunity-related petitions in recent years despite efforts to get the justices to consider the issue.
"I continue to have strong doubts about our ... qualified immunity doctrine," Thomas said in his dissent. "Given the importance of this question, I would grant the petition for certiorari."
The dissent by Thomas, the only black Supreme Court justice, is an indication that at least one member of the high court believes it should reconsider the doctrine that has been decried in recent years from both sides of the aisle -- from Senate Democrats to Trump Supreme Court shortlisters.
"I write separately to register my disquiet over the kudzu-like creep of the modern immunity regime," Trump Supreme Court shortlist member Don Willett said in a 2018 opinion for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. "To some observers, qualified immunity smacks of unqualified impunity, letting public officials duck consequences for bad behavior—no matter how palpably unreasonable."
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., registered her dislike of qualified immunity as Senate Democrats released a resolution on the doctrine this month.
"Law enforcement should not be completely shielded from accountability when they violate someone’s civil rights," she said. "It is clear that the Supreme Court’s qualified immunity doctrine is broken and in need of reform. It is time that we say clearly that police officers should be held accountable to the law and to the people they are sworn to protect, period."
And Carrie Severino, the president of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network -- which is regularly at odds with Harris and her fellow Senate Democrats -- lauded Thomas's dissent.
"The Supreme Court's approach to qualified immunity is a house of cards of judge made law dating back to the Warren Court," she told Fox News. "The interconnected doctrines are devoid of any originalist approach or reference to the common law, and Justice Thomas is right that the entire area of law is in need of re-examination."
Severino is a former clerk for the justice.
Thomas' opinion was short, technical and straightforward, a departure from some of the more florid opinions he and fellow justices sometimes put forward -- Justice Neil Gorsuch worked in a New York Yankees analogy to his opinion Monday on a case about gay and transgender rights. Thomas also didn't say he felt strongly about the issue one way or another, simply emphasizing that he thinks it's important the court address the question.