Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States, 603 U.S. 593 (2024), is a landmark decision [1] [2] of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court determined that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution presumptively extends to all of a president's "official acts" – with absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that ...
In the United States, qualified immunity is a legal principle of federal constitutional law that grants government officials performing discretionary (optional) functions immunity from lawsuits for damages unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known". [1]
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court dealing with the doctrine of qualified immunity. [1]The case centered on the application of mandatory sequencing in determining qualified immunity as set by the 2001 decision, Saucier v.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are trying to negotiate a bipartisan bill to reform federal policing laws, and qualified immunity is a key sticking point. Qualified immunity protects government ...
The Supreme Court ruled in July that Trump is presumed immune from charges for his official acts in office. But prosecutors contend he is vulnerable to charges for unofficial acts that allegedly ...
The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in July that Trump enjoys absolute immunity from prosecution for “official acts” during his presidency. The nation’s top court left it up to lower courts to ...
This is a list of cases before the United States Supreme Court that the Court has agreed to hear and has not yet decided. [1] [2] [3] Future argument dates are in parentheses; arguments in these cases have been scheduled, but have not, and potentially may not, take place.
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine in United States federal law which shields government officials from being held personally liable for discretionary actions performed within their official capacity, unless their actions violate "clearly established" federal law—even if the victim's civil rights were violated. [12]