*Pictured Above: Valerie Rivera protesting the death of her son Eric, who was killed by police officers while holding a toy gun in Los Angeles in 2018. (David McNew/Getty Images)

Qualified immunity makes it extremely difficult to sue public officials for misconduct, and has become one of the most impenetrable barriers to liability for violations of the constitution.  

In short, qualified immunity is a doctrine that is unjust, unnecessary, and unlawful. The special safeguard it grants to government defendants is flatly at odds with the plain language of Section 1983 and unsupported by the relevant legal history.

Its main practical effects are to deny justice to victims whose rights are violated and to undermine accountability for public officials—especially in law enforcement. *Credit: Cato Institute

Qualified immunity is a judicial doctrine developed by the Supreme Court in the late '60s that protects government officials from civil suits and liability for their misconduct, even when they break the law. Our primary federal civil rights statute—generally called “Section 1983” after its place in the U.S. code—says that any government official who violates someone’s constitutional rights “shall be liable” to the party injured. But under the doctrine of qualified immunity, the Court has held that such defendants cannot be sued unless they were in violation of a “clearly established law.” In other words, it is entirely possible—and quite common—for courts to hold that government agents (mainly Police) did violate someone’s rights, but that the illegality of their conduct was not sufficient enough for them to be held liable.

Sign this petition to tell the City of Los Angeles that qualified immunity is unjust and needs to end!