New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity • Hacker News Board

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#71

Post by torstenvl » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:26 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #63

torstenvl wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't qualified immunity applies only to police No. > the solution should be to end qualified immunity for police only. There is a difference between health department inspector and police officer, no reason to apply the same standards in both cases. That makes no sense. A government official performing a government job because they are required to by the government should not then be ordered by the government's co…

> government official performing a government job because they are required to by the government should not then be ordered by the government's court system to pay restitution for damages caused by the government's ordered action There is a lot of grey area in qualified immunity. Government officials actions are protected so long as they are legal. If someone knowingly orders an illegal action, qualified immunity no…

> There is a lot of grey area in qualified immunity

Nope, not really.

> Government actions are protected so long as they are legal. If someone orders an illegal action, they are no longer protected by being government agents because they weren't lawfully acting in their capacities as one

This is not correct. It is not enough for there to be "an illegal action," the action has to have been in violation of clearly established law.

Please stop spreading misinformation in this thread. Having strong feelings on a legal topic does not make you a lawyer.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#72

Post by dumpsterdiver » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:27 AM UTC

croes wrote: post #23

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #10

I don't know why anyone would want to be a police officer. There's no upside. Aside from the genuine affection they get from the people they help here and there. Given the nature of their job, it seems like there would be too much personal risk to get involved in any kind of physical altercation with the public. Because if you get in a fight, I mean a real fight, you better be ready to fight-to-win. Because there's a…

So you think as a compensation for that risk police officers shouldn't be held liable for taking innocent people to prison with their misconduct?

Did you respond to the wrong comment? I’m having trouble making sense of your question in context to the comment you are responding to. I am on mobile though, so maybe I’m experiencing and off by one error.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#73

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:30 AM UTC

torstenvl wrote: post #71

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> government official performing a government job because they are required to by the government should not then be ordered by the government's court system to pay restitution for damages caused by the government's ordered action There is a lot of grey area in qualified immunity. Government officials actions are protected so long as they are legal. If someone knowingly orders an illegal action, qualified immunity no…

> There is a lot of grey area in qualified immunity Nope, not really. > Government actions are protected so long as they are legal. If someone orders an illegal action, they are no longer protected by being government agents because they weren't lawfully acting in their capacities as one This is not correct. It is not enough for there to be "an illegal action," the action has to have been in violation of clearly esta…

> Nope, not really

Within the context of a political discussion among laymen, yes. The relevant case law stretches over decades and jurisdictions. That said, one person's grey is another's black and white.

> This is not correct

It's not phrased legally precisely. But unless I missed something recently, the clearly established law requirement set by Harlow still holds.

Disclosure: I am not a lawyer. I have worked on rule making and legislation in this domain.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#74

Post by dk775 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:30 AM UTC

katbyte wrote: post #38

coolspot wrote: post #17

I think that the Game theory suggests that cops will be less inclined to show up to a call or do anything to fight crime, because it could bring too much legal responsibility. Eat donuts, ignore the radio and you will be fine.

the cops who worry about this are the ones we don't want to be cops. Its like my male friends who complained about the MeToo movement "how will i date when i have to worry about consent" - uh shouldn't you already be confident theres consent before doing anything? lol

Not true. Anyone who joins a job like that is going to want strong protections whether they use them or not. Why would I work for department X where if I make a mistake I can be ruined when department Y will trust that by going thru the process to become LE, in general I’m not looking to be a corrupt maniac. Not to mention those same depts will let me keep an AR in my trunk, send an MRAP to cover me when I am going into a sketchy situations

Similarly, why would I join a dept with a weak union when I can be in one where I’m backed by a union that for better or worse will assume innocent until proven guilty and protect the paying members.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#75

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:38 AM UTC

barnaclejive wrote: post #62

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

"without fear of personal liability" You see no issue with that, seriously?

> You see no issue with that, seriously?

Qualified immunity isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. It is released, for example, when a government official breaks clearly established law. (Counterfactual: the courts have been very narrow in interpreting what "clearly established" means.)

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#76

Post by Aloha » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:38 AM UTC

okwubodu wrote: post #70

danielheath wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a jury is involved, all bets are off.

In that situation, a good faith mistake wouldn't be prosecuted in the first place. It's hard enough getting clear malpractice charged anyways.

I wouldn't bet on that, because it happens all the time now for various white collar crimes.

I'd rather decriminalize more things than create new classes of crimes.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#77

Post by sumedh » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:41 AM UTC

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #42

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

getting rid of unions is also a problem, maybe limit the powers of public service unions. They are allowed to work for pension increase, wages, vacation time, but not allowed to touch disciplinary situations?

Police unions are much worse than other public unions. If other public unions take illegal action, the police can arrest them. When the police union does something illegal, no one is going to do anything about it.

> When the police union does something illegal, no one is going to do anything about it.

Cant the Feds step in?

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#78

Post by kortilla » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:42 AM UTC

barnaclejive wrote: post #65

coolspot wrote: post #17

I think that the Game theory suggests that cops will be less inclined to show up to a call or do anything to fight crime, because it could bring too much legal responsibility. Eat donuts, ignore the radio and you will be fine.

Stop name-dropping "Game theory" into everything. Life is more complex.

More complex for individual actions, but quite good at predicting behavior on average.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#79

Post by tjs8rj » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:45 AM UTC

barnaclejive wrote: post #62

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

"without fear of personal liability" You see no issue with that, seriously?

To be clear: qualified immunity is about civil liability. It doesn’t protect from criminal liability. Qualified immunity isn’t the reason cops don’t go to jail for murder, because it doesn’t apply at all for criminal procedures

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#80

Post by devwastaken » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:46 AM UTC

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

Qualified immunity was made up by courts, their legislating from the bench should have no merit, and therefore revoking qualified immunity is the right thing to do under checks and balances.

We need a replacement, one written in legislation, that puts fixed narrow limits on how immunity applies. If you break the law - you should receive no protections. There is no excuse for enforcers of law to not know the law. This will put the liability into officers And government workers/representatives hands and force them to respect the law.