Cops protected by Qualified Immunity after they knowingly violated their training and the First Amendment

We recommend this article: Cops Tried To Force a Man To Delete a Video of Them Beating a Suspect. They Got Qualified Immunity. In Denver in 2014, a man filmed the police as they punched a suspect in the face 6 times and tossed another person to the ground. The police had been trained that civilians have a right to record public arrests. In direct violation of the law and their training, the officers took the man’s tablet and tried to delete the video of their misconduct.

The court granted Qualified Immunity, which shields the police from legal accountability, because there wasn’t a previous court decision in that circuit that was similar enough to the facts of this incident. Qualified Immunity hinges upon on having a previous legal case with similar facts instead of considering officers’ training, common sense, or the fact that they knowingly violated laws. This article describes the problems with this “clearly established law” test. There are twelve circuit courts; six have held this constitutional right to record the police exists. None of the circuit courts have held there is no constitutional right to record. Other courts, like the 10th Circuit here, only decide the right has not been clearly established in their circuit. As a result of the court’s failure to address the right to record, the next person arrested for recording the police in the 10th Circuit will also lose due to qualified immunity.

Qualified Immunity is supposed to protect police officers unless they know they are violating the law. This case shows that even plainly incompetent officers are shielded. In order to more effectively hold police accountable when they violate people’s rights, we must end qualified immunity.